1464: Bomb Rotterdam!

Adam Curry & John C. Dvorak

2h 58m
June 30th, 2022
Share at 0:00

Executive Producers: Sir Onymous of Dogpatch and Lower Slobbovia, Anonymous, Dame Jill of the Mobile Mansion, Dame Round Stone, Sircumvent the law, Sir Patsy, Jeremy Shown, Baron Sir John of South London, Jeffery King

Associate Executive Producers: Sir Craig Harms, Paul Taveras, Benjamin Chase, Joshua Searcy, Eric Marshall, sir Bob of the clueless country, Erica Koechig, Gordon Schroeder

Cover Artist:

Chapters

Hide suggested chapters
0:00
Start of Show
Woodstock
2:55
Suggested chapter: Ukraine update
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
5
/ 0
7:57
Suggested chapter: the battle for Kiev 'putin lost'
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
1
/ 0
9:26
Suggested chapter: shopping mall / ammo dump got hit by Russians
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
9:47
Suggested chapter: New ban on Russian gold imports
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
5
/ 0
12:29
Suggested chapter: gold might go up
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
13:20
Suggested chapter: Russia going to bomb rotterdam
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
15:43
Suggested chapter: g7 Boris says putin toxic masculinity
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
17:33
Suggested chapter: g7 biden
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
18:37
Suggested chapter: putin will respond if Finland and Sweden join nato
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
22:21
Suggested chapter: Biden and Macron caught on audio
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
23:23
Suggested chapter: Turkey name change increase brand value
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
25:31
Suggested chapter: npr biden 9 out of 10 dems
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
27:42
Suggested chapter: Jan 6 new bogus info has come to light. trump bad
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
30:30
Suggested chapter: mass psychosis gaffe trump responsible for 911
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
1
/ 0
46:55
Suggested chapter: jan 6 key witness died who saw professional ajitator
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
1
/ 0
50:03
Suggested chapter: will hillary try for president?
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
50:52
Suggested chapter: Companies paying for abortion travel expenses
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
52:52
Suggested chapter: de santis has intelligence connections
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
56:31
Suggested chapter: cia /fbi talking to journalists is a crime if it is not authorised
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
59:47
Suggested chapter: military not happy about vaccination mandates
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
1:02:06
Suggested chapter: substack covid legal changes dating back to 2010
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
1:06:09
Suggested chapter: Elmo vax the kids
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
1:07:58
Suggested chapter: Peter mccullough texas senate. 40k vax dead. recall the vax
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
1:11:28
Suggested chapter: massive reduction in birth rates since covid vax
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
1:12:25
Suggested chapter: Roe v. Wade outrage
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
1:25:30
Suggested chapter: Supreme Court says public employees can pray at work
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
1:32:40
Suggested chapter: Donations Segment
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
1
/ 0
1:34:54
Suggested chapter: truth social has trouble with sec
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
2:03:12
Suggested chapter: SHUT UP SLAVE!
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
2
/ 0
2:03:25
Suggested chapter: npr native ad for taco bell
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
2:08:30
Suggested chapter: 2 newspapers per week going out of business
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
2:09:03
Suggested chapter: Holland farmers push back against government farm closures
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
2:10:18
Suggested chapter: 70s tube tops comeback
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
2:11:28
Suggested chapter: eu car plan to cut emissions by 55% by 2030
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
2:13:28
Suggested chapter: low quality cheap Lignite coal
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
2:15:08
Suggested chapter: un climate: more plastic than fish in the oceans
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
2:17:46
Suggested chapter: Space Wars
This is a suggested chapter
KmdoDrgn
0
/ 0
2:17:50
Suggested chapter: rocket crash made 2 craters on moon - no photos as usual
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
1
/ 0
2:18:54
Suggested chapter: elon musk satellite has a bad 1s delay. only as a backup
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
2:21:30
Suggested chapter: Maxwell gets only 20y prison. r Kelly got 30y.
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
2:23:32
Suggested chapter: npr parkas gets 20y prison
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
2:26:04
Suggested chapter: esg backfiring. Ben Jerry's in west Bank.
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
2:27:17
Suggested chapter: FED Woke Legislation
This is a suggested chapter
KmdoDrgn
1
/ 0
2:27:24
Suggested chapter: creature of jekyll Island fed reserve act is being rewritten
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
2:30:05
Suggested chapter: second donation segment
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
2:43:45
Suggested chapter: isos
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
2:45:23
Suggested chapter: climate change Australia dangerous to women
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
2:46:19
Suggested chapter: ppl smuggling. 46 bodies in trailer, 16 alive. steak seasoning on dead
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
2:50:02
Suggested chapter: concealed carry permit holders names and addresses were released
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
2:52:36
Suggested chapter: show closing
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
0
/ 0
2:54:05
Suggested chapter: end of show mixes
This is a suggested chapter
Guest producer
1
/ 0
Suggest a new chapter
BLM LGBBTQQIAAPK+ Noodle Boy
Steven Moore on BBC DEI
BBC staff has been told in “training sessions” that there are more than 150 genders.
They also must develop their “trans brand” by declaring their pronouns on email sign-offs.
Don’t trust news from these people.
Climate Change
46 Migrants Found Dead in Overheated Tractor Trailer
Crossing into the U.S. was a risky business to begin with, and climate change is only making it worse.
Great Reset
G7 no neckties, open collars
Queen Ursula
Although it would be foolhardy to think von der Leyen could have achieved everything she has without political talents of her own, it’s also important to recognize she has always been granted a kind of privilege that far surpasses the parochial advantages accorded to average Germans. Von der Leyen’s family tree traces a legacy of power and brutality, incorporating not only some of Germany’s most significant Nazis but also some of Britain’s largest slave traders and, through marriage, some of the United States’ largest slave owners. Von der Leyen is descended directly from James Ladson, who owned more than 200 slaves when the Civil War broke out.
Although it would be foolhardy to think von der Leyen could have achieved everything she has without political talents of her own, it’s also important to recognize she has always been granted a kind of privilege that far surpasses the parochial advantages accorded to average Germans. Von der Leyen’s family tree traces a legacy of power and brutality, incorporating not only some of Germany’s most significant Nazis but also some of Britain’s largest slave traders and, through marriage, some of the United States’ largest slave owners. Von der Leyen is descended directly from James Ladson, who owned more than 200 slaves when the Civil War broke out.
Why Turkey changed its name: populism, polls and a bird - CNN
Abu Dhabi, UAE (CNN)The nation of Turkey has had it with being associated with a large bird that is best known as a symbol of the North American Thanksgiving holiday.
On Thursday, the United Nations recognized the country's rebranding to Turkiye, pronounced tur-key-yay, in a move Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said would "increase our country's brand value."
"The main reason why Turkey is changing its name is to eliminate the association with the bird," said Sinan Ulgen, Chairman of Istanbul-based think-tank EDAM. "But also, the term is used in colloquial language to denote failure."
For President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who is running for re-election next year, the new name expresses the "culture, civilization and values of the Turkish nation in the best way."
International organizations are now obliged to use the new name, but it won't happen overnight for the broader public, Ulgen told CNN. "It will likely take many years for the broader international public to switch from Turkey to Turkiye."
Destruction of Indon port terminal bridge adds to global paper-product disruptions, Energy & Commodities
AN accident near a plant that supplies the key ingredient to make paper is adding to disruptions that have stoked inflation in everything from toilet paper to diapers and cardboard boxes.
A ship crashed into a bridge near Palembang in Indonesia’s South Sumatra linking a private terminal owned by Asia Pulp & Paper (APP) with its plant, known as OKI, Letchumi Achanah, APP’s head of strategic engagement and advocacy, confirmed after a Bloomberg request. The company is unable to provide details because the matter is still under investigation, Achanah said by email.
The incident destroyed the bridge, 1 of 2 linking the OKI plant and the terminal. The facility, one of the world’s largest, produced 2.6 million tons of pulp last year, according to the company’s annual report.
Exports from OKI are continuing as cargoes can be transferred from one ship to another as was done previously, according to Merrijantij Punguan Pintaria, an industry ministry official. The facility could take 6 months to be repaired but the accident is unlikely to affect Indonesian exports significantly, she said.
After jumping last year, prices for hardwood pulp in China have risen around 40 per cent this year to record levels due to supply disruptions, firm demand and new project delays. The surge has drawn in everyone from Chile’s billionaire Angelini family to Suzano in Brazil and Paracel in Paraguay to build multi-billion dollar plants.
Missouri to join Texas? BOTG Dave Fugazotto
Just doing my duty as a citizen and informing myself on the issues; found this embedded in a "separation of powers" amendment change. Generally, protection from Federal government overreach. But, check out the third bullet.
Do you want to amend the Missouri Constitution to:
clarify the Federal Government’s duty to uphold the rights of Missouri Citizens under the United States Constitution including the Bill of Rights and all other provisions;
identify breaches by the Federal Government; and
allow the State of Missouri to become a “separate administrative region” of the state of Texas, while retaining its status as a state of the United States of America as the legislature and governor of this State may lawfully determine best?
Lots of other proposed amendments relating to rank choice voting, vaccine mandates, freeing the holy herb, parental rights, hand counted votes, educational freedom...lots of predictable red-state type issues (no vax mandates), but a few blue inroads (RCV). Several of the issues have multiple versions with slightly different wording. One of the more interesting ones is "create the crime of treason against persons for voter fraud, failure to report results timely and certain poll worker actions..."
DHS Implementing Personnel Security Continuous Vetting
From: Office of the Under Secretary for Management
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2022 11:56 AM
Subject: DHS Implementing Personnel Security Continuous Vetting
June 28, 2022
Colleagues,
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is implementing a new federal personnel security reform effort known as “Trusted Workforce 2.0” that will eventually include continuous, real-time vetting of all DHS employees and contractors. This vetting model will reduce delays in onboarding, make it easier for employees and contractors to move between U.S. Government departments or contracts, and provide early detection of risks and threats.
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Office of Personnel Management have directed all U.S. Government departments and agencies to enroll their employees and contractors—regardless of clearance level—in a continuous vetting program by fiscal year 2025. At this time, however, only Secret and Top Secret (including TS/SCI) clearance holders are being enrolled in continuous vetting, which will eventually replace personnel security periodic reinvestigations and will help keep our country, our Department, and our workforce safe.
You will not notice an immediate difference when you are enrolled in continuous vetting. The systems and entities that will be checked under the Trusted Workforce 2.0 framework are the same as the ones currently and traditionally examined during background investigations, such as arrest records and credit reports. However, rather than conducting periodic reinvestigations every five to 10 years, DHS will conduct automated checks on a continuous basis to make background checks more efficient and effective. These will supplement background investigations, and this new way of processing information will have zero impact on your records.
As part of the Trusted Workforce 2.0 effort, information about employees will be entered into the Office of the Director of National Intelligence Continuous Evaluation System, which conducts automated checks of relevant security information, and the FBI Rap Back program, which ensures employees and contractors’ fingerprints are continuously compared with criminal history and civil records.
Continuous vetting does not eliminate the personal responsibility of employees and contractors to report foreign travel, foreign contacts, arrests, and other matters required by any DHS policies, rules, or regulations.
As always, your privacy is, and will remain, paramount. Nothing in this new system will change our commitment to your fundamental rights and liberties as public servants and as Americans. A Privacy Impact Assessment for the information technology system that supports the DHS continuous vetting program, “Privacy Impact Assessment Update for the Integrated Security Management System (ISMS) – Continuous Evaluation,” can be found here. The same personnel security due process right that exists for employees today, which is outlined in DHS Instruction 121-01-007, “The DHS Personnel Security, Suitability and Fitness Program”, will apply under Trusted Workforce 2.0.
If you have any questions, please visit the Trusted Workforce 2.0 Policy and Communications DHS Connect page. For additional information, please contact your Component’s personnel security office, or the DHS Office of the Chief Security Officer, Personnel Security Program Office at persecpolicy@hq.dhs.gov.
Sincerely,
R.D. Alles
Acting Under Secretary for Management
Inflation and Energy
70's - will tube tops make a comeback?
Japan urges 37 million people to switch off lights - BBC News
Japan's government has urged people in Tokyo and its surrounding area to use less electricity on Monday, as it warned that supplies will be strained as the country faces a heatwave.
The Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry expects demand for power to be "severe" this afternoon local time.
It said people should switch off unnecessary lights but still use air conditioning to avoid heatstroke.
For weeks, officials have warned of a power crunch as temperatures rise.
Over the weekend, the temperature in central Tokyo rose above 35C, while the city of Isesaki, northwest of the capital, saw a record 40.2C. That was the highest temperature ever recorded in June for Japan.
June marks the start of summer in Japan, with temperatures typically staying below 30C during the month.
SCOTUS
Food Security
Dutch farmer with two sledgehammers
ESG
European fund managers set to go all in on ESG, survey says | Reuters
Europe seeks to fuel sustainable funds to meet net-zero targets
72% of asset managers consider halting non-ESG product launches
68% of distributors plan to cease non-ESG products distribution
June 27 (Reuters) - Over two-thirds of European asset managers and distributors are considering halting the launch or distribution of products that do not comply with environmental, social and governance (ESG) standards, a survey by PwC Luxembourg showed on Monday.
Flows into ESG funds have surged in recent years, driven in part by a growing regulatory focus on issues such as climate change as governments seek to push more money to activities that can help them meet their net-zero emissions goals.
The PwC survey of 3,354 respondents suggested ESG assets domiciled in Europe could grow to between 7.4 trillion euros and 9.0 trillion euros ($7.8 to $9.5 trillion) by 2025 and account for up to 56% of total European mutual fund assets, against 37% at the end of last year.
Mandates & Boosters
Macao Lockdowns
Civil Protection Operation
Centre: All residents in Macao must continue to self-administer a rapid antigen test today (26 June) and upload the result to the declaration platform at https://app.ssm.gov.mo/generalrat/. One is requested to take a photo to record the result if he/she is unsuccessful in making online declaration. If the antigen test result is positive, one should call an ambulance by phone at 119, 120 or 2857 2222 as soon as possible after the declaration or record is made. He/she and the co-living individuals must stay at home and patiently wait for the ambulance arranged by the authorities to transport them to the quarantine site. To reduce the risk of cross-infection, all people in Macao should stay at home and stop unnecessary activities.
Civic Protection Operation Centre: All people in Macao must take the mass nucleic acid test from 9:00 a.m. on June 27 to 6:00 p.m. on June 28. An advance appointment is compulsory for the general testing stations. Those with special needs can use the caring testing stations that do not require an advance appointment. All people must take the rapid antigen test before going out, please notify the fire services when the result is positive (Tel: 119, 120 or 28572222),stay on spot with housemates and wait for quarantine and nucleic acid test arrangements. During the mass nucleic acid test, each person will receive five rapid antigen test kits and ten KN 95 masks (not for children to use). Please make sure to take them before leaving the station, no re-collection will be arranged. Residents should not use the testing station that is not near their home. Avoid taking public transportation. During waiting, residents must maintain a one-meter distance and follow the instructions on the spot.
Civil Protection Operations Centre: The Citywide NAT Programme will end today (June 28) at 6:00 p.m. All general stations with a waiting time of less than 15 minutes do not need an appointment. All people in Macao should take the test asap, and should avoid going to the stations for sampling 2 hours before the ending time, so as to avoid long queues and crowd gathering, which will increase the risk of infection.
Ukraine Russia
Prime Time Purge
VAERS
Researchers created gene-edited hamsters full of rage in an experiment gone wrong
A group of researchers made gene-edited hamsters that were meant to be less aggressive. The researchers used CRISPR, a gene-editing platform, to remove a gene they believed was responsible for aggressive behavior in hamsters. However, the genetic modification had a much different effect. Instead of being more docile, the hamsters became overly aggressive.
Covid Vaccines and Infertility
Unvaccinated sperm is the new bitcoin
M5M
STORIES
Exclusive: More Vaccine-Injured Pilots Speak Out as Groups Pressure Airlines, Regulators to End Mandates ' Children's Health Defense
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 16:53
Miss a day, miss a lot. Subscribe to The Defender's Top News of the Day. It's free.
Sharp chest pains. Myocarditis and pericarditis. Heart attacks. Strokes and subsequent blindness.
These are just some of the many COVID-19 vaccine-related adverse events reported by commercial airline pilots and by a growing number of advocacy groups representing aviation industry workers.
According to these individuals and groups, the number of pilots speaking out about their vaccine injuries is dwarfed by the number of pilots who are still flying despite experiencing concerning symptoms '-- but not speaking out because of what they describe as a culture of intimidation within the aviation industry.
These individuals fear they will lose their jobs and livelihoods in retaliation if they reveal their symptoms or go public with their stories, sources told The Defender.
Still, a growing number of pilots are coming forward.
Last month, The Defender published the accounts of several pilots '-- and of the widow of a pilot who died from a vaccine-related adverse event.
Since then, more pilots have shared their stories, including one who is currently flying for a commercial airline.
A growing number of advocacy organizations, representing workers across the aviation industry and in several countries, are joining these pilots in speaking out.
The Defender previously reported on actions by the U.S. Freedom Flyers (USFF) and other legal advocates in the U.S.
Since then, representatives from the Global Aviation Advocacy Coalition (GAA) and the Canada-based Free To Fly also spoke with The Defender about their initiatives.
Meanwhile, pilots in Canada and the Netherlands recently reported significant legal victories in separate vaccine-related cases.
In interviews with The Defender, pilots injured by COVID-19 vaccines said despite a ''culture of fear and intimidation'' they are compelled to speak out against vaccine mandates that rob pilots of their careers '-- and in some cases their lives.https://t.co/YYMCVg9ywV
'-- Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) May 6, 2022
More pilots come forward, speak to The Defender
Steven Hornsby, a 52-year-old pilot with a legacy passenger airline company, was once an active weightlifter and cyclist, biking 10-26 miles every other day.
He is also a veteran of the U.S. Marine Corps and Operation Enduring Freedom. Per FAA requirements, he passed 24 medical exams in the past 12 years, including 12 electrocardiograms (ECGs).
Hornsby told The Defender, ''I've never had any cardiovascular issues in my life, nor have I ever had any major health issues '... I eat healthy and live what I believe to be a balanced lifestyle.''
Hornsby, however, is not flying today because, he said, he was ''coerced '... to get the COVID-19 vaccine,'' and his employer ''made it very clear that all employees would be required to get it and that medical/religious exemptions would be very difficult to get.''
Hornsby's difficulties began after receiving the second dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine.
''After my second shot, I initially had zero issues, with little more than light fatigue on day two, Hornsby said. ''The 12th day, however, was the culmination of the vaccine and the continuous stress I was adding to my heart from rigorous exercise.''
As he was driving with family, Hornsby said he felt sharp chest pains, ''pain radiating through my left arm, and my heart rate spiked as if beating in my neck.''
Hornsby said it took several different diagnoses from doctors and medical practitioners to make a connection between his health issues and the vaccine.
A nurse at an urgent care facility first told him his symptoms did not correlate to a heart attack and were most likely unrelated to the vaccine. Later, at a hospital emergency room, he was again told his symptoms were not likely to be related to the vaccine.
''At that point,'' Hornsby said, ''I was indignant. Why would a healthcare provider dismiss that perspective? This was my eye-opening reality that a major cover-up was in play.''
Hornsby was ultimately diagnosed with elevated blood pressure but was told he had not suffered a heart attack. Doctors advised him to follow up with a cardiologist, and told him they would not report his case to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).
Hornsby said his cardiologist, after performing blood work, told him his heart was healthy, and though the doctor didn't dismiss the possibility that his heart issues were connected to the vaccine, he told him the symptoms were ''most likely from stress or a musculoskeletal problem.''
''I had to stop trying to force my perceived diagnosis '-- bias against the vaccine '-- and listen to the professionals,'' Hornsby said, adding ''I needed to be patient,'' even after a union doctor also dismissed Hornsby's concerns that his symptoms were related to the vaccine.
Hornsby continued experiencing ''intermittent pains,'' despite taking home remedies such as tea and supplements to calm his heart rate, which he said were helpful.
It was only in December 2021, when his medical certification was due for renewal, that his aeromedical examiner (AME) advised him to wear a Holter monitor (a type of portable ECG) for one week to monitor his heart.
''That is when I discovered that I had arrhythmia issues, heart palpitations and [an] irregular heart rate, which was occurring almost exclusively at night,'' said Hornsby. ''I reported back to my AME, who then told me I was grounded and that I should go find a good cardiologist and get healthy.''
The following month, another cardiologist diagnosed Hornsby with vaccine-induced myocarditis.
''My heart was inflamed,'' said Hornsby. ''After an echocardiogram, it showed my heart mildly dilated with fluid behind my heart.''
Hornsby said he's ''doing much better,'' but he's still not flying. He's disappointed with the dismissive manner in which several doctors addressed his concerns.
''Had doctors been willing to view my case '-- and I suspect others '-- with an open mind, this could have been diagnosed much, much earlier,'' he said. ''Looking back, had my heart not been healthy, I would have surely died from cardiac arrest like you're seeing in young athletes.''
Hornsby said he believes other pilots with similar symptoms are still flying.
''I suspect there are many pilots flying around with minor and perhaps major issues,'' Hornsby said. ''The vaccine is/was experimental and for good cause. No one knows the long-term effects.''
He added:
''How many years have been shaved from my life? Will I develop scar tissue in my heart? Will I get cancer as a result? Has this trash degraded my immune system? Only God knows.''
Pilot injured by Moderna shot: 'I have a family to feed'
In fact, The Defender interviewed another pilot '-- currently flying for a commercial airline in the U.S. '-- who is experiencing such health difficulties.
The pilot, who spoke to The Defender on condition of anonymity, said:
''I was experiencing chest pain, usually at night, almost like somebody had their hand around my heart and was squeezing.
''Generally, [the pain] would subside during the day, but '... would appear occasionally out of nowhere and I would need to lie down.
''It would manifest as pain, but also like something was lodged deep in my esophagus, like I had a piece of food or air that was pressing upon my chest area.''
According to the pilot, his symptoms ''began about a week after the second Moderna vaccination.
He said the airline he works for threatened to terminate anyone who didn't get the vaccine. ''I have a family to feed, so I was left with little choice.''
He said he is ''on reserve'' and not flying often. While his symptoms have recently subsided, he felt that ''looking into further treatment would result in an answer that would be unfavorable to my medical [certification].''
He added:
''In the back of my mind though, the thought of what it could mean for my future health is there.
''The current situation I am faced with is that supporting a family is what is most important to me. Fear of loss of my pilot medical [certification] after being mandated to get this vaccine is the path I am currently on.''
Terminated after 19 years for refusing COVID shot, former Australian pilot advocates for others
Australia, like Canada, has a government-level vaccine mandate for airline crew and airport workers. In Australia, this mandate went into effect on Nov. 15, 2021.
Glen Waters is a former captain with Virgin Australia who is now a spokesman for a group of employees from the same airline.
Waters, who had held the rank of captain for 19 years before being terminated by Virgin Australia for refusing the vaccine, spoke to The Defender on behalf of several pilots who are suffering from vaccine injuries.
According to Waters, ''none of the pilots suffering from injuries are prepared to talk'' because ''the company is actively trying to terminate anyone reporting vaccine injury.''
Waters said employees whose health issues are characterized as ''unrelated'' to the vaccine are being treated by Virgin Australia ''as you would expect a company to care for its employees.''
Waters stated ''there are several reasons injured pilots will not come forward,'' including:
''There is a stigma attached to anti-vaccine sentiment in any form.There is a reluctance on the part of the medical community to get involved with possible vaccine injuries.Vaccine makers will actively fight against injury claims.Insurance companies have distanced themselves from claims involving the vaccine.Pilots don't want to lose their medical certifications, jobs or careers.Waters said of approximately 900 pilots flying with Virgin Australia, he is aware of nine who are no longer flying because of medical complications that could be linked to the vaccine.
''No doubt there are many more who are continuing to fly with troubling symptoms,'' he said.
These symptoms, according to Waters, most commonly include myocarditis and pericarditis. Some symptoms, however, are even more serious.
Waters told The Defender:
''We have one captain [who had] a stroke and went blind, and another had a heart attack and fell down the boarding stairs after landing.
''There have been complaints of constant headaches and numerous reports of chest pains and shortness of breath.
''A number of cabin crew have reported pins and needles in their limbs, almost like electric shocks that persist for hours at a time.
''I have heard [about cases of] tinnitus, vertigo and brain fog, including temporary blindness, in several crew. Disrupted menstrual cycles are reported frequently, perhaps affecting dozens [of employees].''
However, according to Waters, perhaps due to the work environment, not all pilots are comfortable in stating openly that there may be a connection between their health difficulties and the vaccines.
''I'm only aware of three who say the symptoms started within an hour of the vaccine, one within seven days,'' he said.
''The stroke and heart attack victims are not attributing their medical event to the vaccine as far as I am aware. Neither [did] the captain who died of a sudden onset of cancer early this year.''
Some employees may not understand their symptoms might be related to the vaccine, Waters said. ''Many of the early warning signs '-- persistent headaches, chest pains, breathlessness '-- are not recognized by aircrew as possible adverse reactions,'' Waters said.
''The heart attacks and strokes are occurring in otherwise fit and healthy individuals. They are sudden and are a real risk to flight safety.''
Waters explained that Australia's Civil Aviation Safety Authority, similar to other such bodies globally, has ''a 1% rule'' for pilots: If they have a medical condition ''that presents a greater than 1% chance of resulting in an incapacitation event within the next 12 months, then they are considered medically unfit to fly.''
In light of this, according to Waters, ''numerous aviation doctors, including Lt. Col.Theresa Long and Lt. Col. Peter Chambers, have recommended tests that will help determine the real risk to pilots.''
These include the D-dimer test for blood-clotting conditions, a complete blood count, post-vaccination ECG analysis, a cardiac MRI and others.
As pilots speak out, there are some legal victories
Despite what numerous pilots call a hostile environment in the aviation industry toward claims of vaccine injury, a recent series of legal decisions were in pilots' favor and more legal actions are in progress.
A judge at the Amsterdam Court of Appeals in the Netherlands on June 2 ruled in favor of the Dutch Airline Pilots Association, in a case that challenged vaccine mandates introduced by Dutch airline KLM for new pilots.
According to the ruling:
''It is considered that requesting and demanding a vaccination against corona constitutes an unjustified infringement of the fundamental rights of the candidate pilots.
''In particular, it infringes the privacy (Article 8 ECHR) [the European Convention on Human Rights] of the candidate pilots.
''After all, the decision whether or not to have yourself vaccinated is something that belongs pre-eminently to this private sphere.
''Requiring the candidate pilot to be vaccinated and to give a positive answer to that question about vaccination status, therefore, violates this. KLM thus leaves no choice to candidate pilots who want to join KLM.''
Per the June 2 ruling, KLM is prohibited from requesting or collecting such information from candidate pilots, or rejecting candidates on the basis of their vaccination status, under penalty of '‚¬100,000 (approximately $105,000) per violation.
Following the ruling, the Dutch Pilots Association issued a statement, remarking:
''The [association] endorses the government's position that vaccination is important, but that compulsory vaccination by the employer is not permitted.
''We were of the opinion that KLM did not comply with this and, moreover, violated our agreements about this, without there being any operational necessity.''
In Canada, the federal government on June 14 announced most travel-related vaccine mandates would be lifted as of June 20.
Responding to this announcement, in a statement sent to The Defender, Free to Fly credited those who opposed the mandates, stating:
''This dark season helps reinforce an important maxim; true change only comes about through tenacity, courage, and the relentless pursuit of truth by principled men and women.
''Across our nation, many Canadians refused to give up on freedom and fought for our fragile democracy. We feel no 'gratitude' towards an emboldened state for ceasing to violate God-given freedoms.
''We must never forget our recent travails, and cannot be lulled into complacency, certainly with Trudeau's government openly threatening reinstatement of mandates with any 'new variant'.''
''We will continue to pursue them, insisting on uncompromising standards in our industry and the assurance we never again go down this road of medical segregation.''
In another recent development, Canadian pilot Ross Wightman became just one of a small number of people who have received compensation from Canada's Vaccine Injury Support Program.
Wightman was diagnosed with Guillain-Barr(C) Syndrome, a rare condition that affects the nervous system and may cause muscle weakness, paralysis or even death.
He developed the condition within days of receiving his first and only dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. For the past year, Wightman has been unable to work, as he has substantially limited mobility in his arms and legs.
Global Aviation Advocacy Coalition pens open letter to aviation industry
In an open letter to the aviation industry, the GAA raised serious allegations regarding industry vaccine mandates, which the GAA said resulted in a growing number of vaccine-injured pilots who are unable to fly and who may never do so again '-- and an increasing number of pilots who continue to fly while experiencing potentially serious symptoms.
The letter was signed by organizations including the USFF, Free To Fly Canada, the Aussie Freedom Flyers, the UK Freedom Flyers, the International Medical Alliance, the Global Covid Summit, the Canadian Covid Care Alliance, the UK Medical Freedom Alliance, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, and several other groups in the U.S., France, the Netherlands, Switzerland and the U.K., as well as more than 17,000 physicians and medical scientists from around the world and ''thousands of pilots at over 30 global airlines.
The GAA said it is in communication with pilots at the following U.S.-based airlines: Alaska, American, Delta, Frontier, JetBlue, Southwest, Spirit and United, and 12 major air carriers in Australia, Canada, France, Germany and the Netherlands.
According to the GAA's open letter, the organization and the scientists and doctors it works with ''are hearing daily from vaccine-injured airline pilots'' about conditions including ''cardiovascular issues, blood clots [and] neurological and auditory issues.''
The injured pilots are experiencing a broad spectrum of symptoms, ''ranging up to death,'' the GAA wrote, adding the symptoms ''at least correlate to receiving COVID-19 vaccinations.''
The GAA wrote that in many instances, these conditions are serious enough that ''pilots have lost medical certification and may not recover the same,'' while others ''are continuing to pilot aircraft while carrying symptoms that should be declared and investigated, creating a human factors hazard of unprecedented breadth,'' and ''a landscape which should greatly concern airlines and the traveling public.''
Pilots continue to fly despite experiencing such symptoms, said the GAA, because those ''who report their injury face possible loss of licensing, income, and career while receiving little to no support from their unions, and a prosecutorial invective from employing airlines.''
The GAA said many pilots were reluctant to receive the COVID-19 vaccine and opposed mandates:
''Pilots are trained to be careful analysts of their environment, recognizing risks and actively mitigating. For many, their training and differential risk analysis led to concerns and negative conclusions regarding the compatibility of COVID-19 vaccination with health and flight safety.
''Not only did many pilots disagree with arbitrary requirements embodied in vaccination mandates, but they also saw risks in the unanswered questions and unjustified speed and pressure behind the vaccine rollouts. They lobbied their airlines and politicians, recommending caution and opposing mandates.''
However, stated the GAA, for many pilots, it was a choice between vaccination and job loss:
''Once airlines mandated vaccination, many pilots steadfastly refused based on risk and were subsequently put on unpaid leave or outright terminated.
''Principled professionals were forced out of aviation and the industry lost hundreds of thousands of hours of experience. Now, the global airline industry is heading into a dire staffing crisis.
''Thousands of other pilots were coerced into vaccination to provide for their families. This has taken a toll on their mental health.''
For the GAA, blame lies with the mandates '-- and more broadly, with the airlines, regulators and unions:
'' '... there appears to be no evidence of aviation regulators, airlines or unions having performed any of their own due diligence into COVID-19 vaccines and the impact on pilot health or performance.
''This is at complete odds with existing aviation medical standards. Questions exist around competence and possible negligence.
''Failure to address this potential medical watershed will make the airlines and unions complicit in a culture shift that has rocked the aviation mantra of 'safety first, always.'''
The GAA called on civil aviation authorities such as the Federal Aviation Administration, Transport Canada, UK Civil Aviation Authority, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency and Australia's Civil Aviation Safety Authority to begin fulfilling their regulatory obligations.
''The crisis in pilot health must be publicly addressed by airlines and representing unions to restore flight safety to what we once knew,'' their letter stated.
GAA called for:
''Where it exists, mandated COVID-19 vaccination for aviation workers must be discontinued.A permissive environment for self-reporting needs to be reemphasized by regulators and airlines.Thorough and objective aviation medical screenings of pilots and cabin crew need to be a high priority. These must be backed by the regulator and should focus on high prevalence harms which are now showing up in the general public and in our flight crews.Airlines and regulators hold data about sickness and medical certificate suspension, including symptoms and causal reasons. This data should be analysed by independent third parties to establish or rule out COVID-19 vaccination as a possible cause.''Free to Fly steps up pressure Canadian authorities, airlines
Canada-based Free to Fly represents close to 3,000 aviation professionals, according to its director, Greg Hill, who spoke to The Defender.
These professionals include pilots, flight attendants, air traffic controllers, maintenance workers and customer service representatives.
According to Hill, industry workers have reported a wide range of health issues, including ''generalized chest pains, myocarditis, enlarged heart, blood clots, hearing loss, partial paralysis, lymph issues [and] broad autoimmune dysfunction.''
Some of the injured pilots are ''high-end athletes'' who experienced a ''major decrease in their performance capacity.''
''We've had some inexplicable deaths at unreasonably young ages,'' Hill said, and ''an increase in in-flight diversions with one of our airlines in particular.''
While Hill left open the possibility that at least some of these incidents weren't vaccine-related, he said that Canadian authorities show ''an unwillingness to do a proper investigation.''
''Transport Canada, the airline industry, the airlines and the unions have been uniformly silent on the matter,'' Hill said.
Indeed, Hill said the aviation industry, regulators and unions in Canada have not been responsive to outreach from Free to Fly.
Referring to a document, prepared in conjunction with the Canadian COVID Care Alliance, that said flight crew pilots were most at risk of vaccine-related adverse effects due to their work environment, Hill said:
''We gave this to the two largest pilot unions in the country, the Air Canada Pilots Association and ALPA, the Airline Pilots Association '... they have refused to respond to it.
''We also sent it to management at two of our largest airlines '... they also have refused to even respond to it. And this was raising very explicitly the risks that these medical professionals felt needed, at the very least, to be investigated.
''And as yet, we've had nothing but silence formally as far as a response from these groups, as far as adverse events, vaccine injuries.''
The document provides: information on a union's obligation to its members; a differential risk analysis of COVID-19 versus the vaccines; an analysis of natural versus vaccine-induced immunity; an analysis of adverse reactions to the vaccines and particular risks faced by flight crews; a list of alternate treatment options for COVID-19; and a discussion of informed consent and coercion.
According to Hill, the policy is ''no jab, no job'' for pilots and aviation professionals in Canada, unless they are granted religious or medical exemptions.
But, said Hill, even in the rare instance when an exemption is granted, those employees nevertheless have found themselves out of work, due to airline practices that Hill described as extortionate.
Hill told The Defender:
''If you're not willing to take the jab and you can't be accommodated with a religious or medical exemption, then you are either on unpaid leave or outright terminated. Some of our pilots have already been terminated.
''The vast, vast majority of these accommodations were outright denied '... some of the stories of people that were denied medical accommodations are truly shocking, the same on the religious aspect.
''The handful that were approved '... are simply another round of extortion. Some of them were denied, then they were approved retroactively '... essentially they were approved, but then it didn't change anything '... you continue your unpaid leave, but you're allowed your benefits.''
Similar to claims made in an open letter hand-delivered to the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and major U.S. air carriers in December 2021, Free to Fly also alleged a violation of existing aviation regulations, this time in Canada.
According to Hill:
''There was, at one point, on the Transport Canada website, this was July 2021, a line that specifically said it remains a general position of Transport Canada '... that participation in medical trials is not considered compatible with aviation medical certification.
''A number of us were asking questions '... and saying, 'Well, what's up with this?' And the answer was these [vaccines] are approved. And we said, 'No, they're not fully approved, they're approved under interim order.'
Hill said if you read that interim order, it was quite laughable. It basically said, 'We'll roll these vaccines out and we'll gather data. Right now we feel that they're okay and we'll continue to assess as we continue to jab people,' which just seems insane.
''So we asked these explicit questions, got no suitable answers,'' Hill said. ''And the week following '... they simply memory-holed it, they removed that line and it's no longer on the website. That was their response.''
Hill also described a culture of intimidation in Canada among pilots and flight crews, resulting in a reluctance to come forward with vaccine injury claims:
''Unless the individuals involved are willing to speak to it, I can't say '... every pilot that's currently still employed '... is living in fear of speaking explicitly, certainly in any public forum '... for fear of the retribution that has been rolled out against those of us who no longer have work because we refuse to go down this road and insisted upon medical freedom and in doing a proper analysis of what we're up against here.''
This has not stopped Free To Fly from pursuing legal action in Canada. According to Hill, in Canada, '' '... you can't seek private representation against your company. You have to do it through your union. And when the unions decide to not engage, you're left between a rock and a hard place.
Hill added:
'' '... if you read through the case law precedent over the past year or two in Canada, the courts have very, very much chosen a side. And the concern is within an English common law system, if we continue to litigate, litigate and lose and lose and lose, you create precedent that makes it harder and harder to dig your way out.
''Unfortunately, in this country, the law is downstream of politics. It's heavily influenced by it, certainly in my opinion. And politics, of course, is downstream of culture. So unless you impact culture and impact the broader narrative, it's very difficult to see legal solutions.''
Free to Fly on June 6 sent a letter to Canada's minister of transport, co-signed by the GAA, containing ''important, detailed questions regarding COVID-19 vaccines and flight safety,'' according to Hill.
As of this writing, the minister has not responded.
Hill said:
''It's just mind-boggling '... we've literally stood the [aviation industry's] safety culture on its head, and that's the greatest concern to us.
''It's not an interest in a desire for conflict. I long for the world before this became an all-consuming role, where we're pushing to try and get ourselves back to a sense of normalcy and proper risk assessment and risk mitigation, which is what pilots are really dedicated to.
''So that's all we want: that ability to look at this properly and analyze it properly '... aviation medical screenings focusing on some of the high prevalence harms that we've seen, that we're hearing about '... these screenings need to be backed by the [Canadian] regulator who, in our opinion, has not done their job properly over the past couple of years.
As far as suspensions, Hill said, pilot who are off and on have not been able to get their medical [certification] back. And these need to be analyzed by independent third parties.
Some pilots and aviation professionals, in addition to speaking out, are joining advocacy groups.
For instance, Hornsby and the pilot quoted in this story who opted to remain anonymous, have joined USFF, according to its co-founder, Josh Yoder, as are the pilots and air traffic controllers who previously shared their stories with The Defender.
USFF has recently begun filing a series of lawsuits against airlines and federal agencies in response to the vaccine mandates and their aftermath.
Ultimately, though, the public '-- not just pilots and aviation professionals '-- must also speak out, according to Hill.
''Whether it's Canada, the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom, etc., we'd like to see the public as a whole rising up and speaking out publicly about these issues, asking why the regulators haven't done proper risk assessments in regards to where we're at with these jabs.
Researchers created gene-edited hamsters full of rage in an experiment gone wrong
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 16:52
A group of researchers made gene-edited hamsters that were meant to be less aggressive. The researchers used CRISPR, a gene-editing platform, to remove a gene they believed was responsible for aggressive behavior in hamsters. However, the genetic modification had a much different effect. Instead of being more docile, the hamsters became overly aggressive.
Scientists accidentally made angry and aggressive gene-edited hamsters Image source: stockcrafter / Adobe Hamsters have been at the heart of many animal studies for decades. That's because these furry little rodents have a social organization and a stress response that is very human-like. Because of this, scientists have used the rodents to try to better understand what governs social behaviors like anger, stress, and so on.
Several decades ago, back in the early 1980s, a group of researchers discovered that a hormone known as arginine vasopressin (AVP) could change the behavior of hamsters. From here, the scientists dug deeper into the differences between the sexes of hamsters and the AVP receptor, called Avpr1a. It's this hormone that was changed in the gene-edited hamsters.
Previously, researchers found that males injected with Avpr1a activators became more aggressive, while female hamsters became less aggressive. Alternatively, when injecting males with Avpr1a inhibitors, males became more docile, while females became aggressive. More research into the hamster's response to Avpr1a showed how it regulates aggression in the rodents. At least, we thought it did.
Turning decades of research on its head Image source: Pushpangadan / Adobe In 2007, another test saw researchers removing the Avpr1a gene in male mice. They expected to see reduced aggression because of the lack of AVP signaling. However, the mice showed no difference in aggression levels than normal mice. Now, researchers have tested this same idea by creating gene-edited hamsters.
The researchers used CRISPR-Cas9 to remove the Avrpr1a receptor gene in both male and female hamsters. As with the mice, they expected it to reduce aggression levels overall. However, that hypothesis was incorrect. Instead, the female and male gene-edited hamsters both became more aggressive. They were even going so far as to attack other hamsters of the same sex.
The results are puzzling, to be sure, especially with almost four decades of research into how Avpr1a affects these animals. While we know that AVP increases social behaviors, scientists now say it could have more global effects too. Instead of linking these receptors to single parts of the brain, the researchers say we need to see how they affect ''entire circuits of the brain.''
This isn't the first time we've used gene editing to mess around with animals. Scientists have also tried gene-editing in cats, as well as created genetically modified cockroaches. The researchers published their findings on the experiment in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Health insurance premiums through marketplace poised to jump in 2023
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 16:49
The Good Brigade | Digitalvision | Getty Images
If you get your health insurance through the government Health Insurance Marketplace, you may want to brace for higher premiums next year.
Unless Congress takes action, enhanced premium subsidies '-- technically, tax credits '-- that have been in place for 2021 and 2022 will disappear after this year. The change would affect 13 million of the 14.5 million people who get their health insurance through the federal exchange or their state's marketplace.
"The default is that the expanded subsidies will expire at the end of this year," said Cynthia Cox, a vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation and director of its Affordable Care Act program. "On average, premiums would go up more than 50%, but for some it will be more."
More from Personal Finance:Cost to finance a new car hits a record $656 per monthSome medical debt will soon disappear from credit reportsTying the knot? Add 'marriage tax penalty' to potential cost
Most enrollees '-- which includes the self-employed and workers with no job-based health insurance '-- receive subsidies, which reduce what they pay in premiums. Some people also may qualify for help with cost-sharing such as deductibles and copays on certain plans, depending on their income.
Before the temporary changes to the calculation for subsidy eligibility, the aid was generally only available to households with income from 100% to 400% of the poverty level.
The American Rescue Plan Act, which was signed into law in March 2021, removed '-- for two years '-- that income cap, and the amount that anyone pays for premiums during the reprieve is limited to 8.5% of their income as calculated by the exchange.
Assuming Congress does not extend the expanded tax credits, only people with household income from 100% to 400% of the federal poverty level will once again qualify for subsidies.
Exactly how much of a premium increase a person would see depends on income, age, the premium cost where they live and how the premiums charged by insurers change for next year, according to Kaiser.
Here's a hypothetical example, based on a report from the Congressional Budget Office: Say a 64-year-old with $58,000 in income '-- about 430% of the 2022 poverty level of $13,590 '-- has insurance through the exchange. The 8.5% limit currently in place means they would pay no more than $4,950 for premiums this year. However, if faced with a 400% cap on eligibility in 2023, that same person would pay $12,900 for premiums because they'd no longer qualify for subsidies.
A proposal to extend the extra subsidies through 2025 was included in the Democrats' Build Back Better bill, which cleared the House last year but fell apart in the Senate.
It's uncertain whether the provision will be revived in some form via other legislation that Democrats may try to get through the Senate before a new Congress starts in January '-- the makeup of which could look very different due to the midterm elections Nov. 8.
European fund managers set to go all in on ESG, survey says | Reuters
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 16:46
A power-generating windmill turbine and the church of the village are pictured during sunset at a wind park in Ecoust-Saint-Mein, France, September 6, 2020. REUTERS/Pascal Rossignol/File Photo
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comEurope seeks to fuel sustainable funds to meet net-zero targets72% of asset managers consider halting non-ESG product launches68% of distributors plan to cease non-ESG products distributionJune 27 (Reuters) - Over two-thirds of European asset managers and distributors are considering halting the launch or distribution of products that do not comply with environmental, social and governance (ESG) standards, a survey by PwC Luxembourg showed on Monday.
Flows into ESG funds have surged in recent years, driven in part by a growing regulatory focus on issues such as climate change as governments seek to push more money to activities that can help them meet their net-zero emissions goals.
The PwC survey of 3,354 respondents suggested ESG assets domiciled in Europe could grow to between 7.4 trillion euros and 9.0 trillion euros ($7.8 to $9.5 trillion) by 2025 and account for up to 56% of total European mutual fund assets, against 37% at the end of last year.
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comAgainst that backdrop, almost 72% of European asset managers were willing to halt all non-ESG product launches, with more than 60% planning to do so by the end of 2024, PwC wrote in its report, adding it foresaw long-term challenges for asset managers that maintain a hybrid ESG/non-ESG product range as the shift materialises.
Among independent financial advisers, private and retail banks, as much as 68% plan to cease their distribution of non-ESG products altogether, of which over half intend to do so within the coming two years, the survey showed.
"As regional regulations become increasingly stringent and as efforts towards the development of global ESG standards intensify, managers '' especially those willing to compete at a global level '' will be pushed towards an all-encompassing alignment of their products and operations with ESG," financial services market leader at PwC Olivier Carre said.
($1 = 0.9480 euros)
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comReporting by Juliette Portala; Editing by Simon Jessop and Mark Potter
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
Cancelled flight? Shoddy clothing? Disappointing meal? Blame skimpflation, the hidden curse of 2022 | Consumer affairs | The Guardian
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 16:39
D id your flight get cancelled in the school holidays? Has the delivery of your new sofa been delayed? Was your last meal out disappointing? Are your new socks see-through? Are you reading this while you are on hold to customer services? Does everything feel just a little bit worse?
The cost of living crisis has given British households a crash course in the misery caused by inflation, which is scaling heights not seen since the 1980s. But what if there is also another force at work in the economy, lurking in the background and making a bad situation that little bit grimmer?
Welcome to ''skimpflation'' '' a term popularised in the US and gaining traction in the UK. ''Skimpflation is when consumers are getting less for their money,'' says Alan Cole, a writer at Full Stack Economics and formerly a senior economist at the joint economic committee of the US Congress. ''Unlike typical inflation, where they're paying more for the same goods, skimpflation is when they're paying the same for something that worsened in quality.''
The most common example is ''having to wait longer for things'', says Cole. ''If you've ordered furniture or an appliance recently, you'll find that delivery times are slow. That loss of timeliness is a quality downgrade.''
Thanks to the current crisis, we are all familiar with what inflation means: the price of stuff is going up, sometimes by an eye-watering amount. There have also been plenty of examples of shrinkflation, which is when a company reduces the size of a packet of chocolate or crisps, for instance, but the price stays the same.
But even if it is not as easy to identify, when you start to look for skimpflation, you can see it everywhere. It is in the supermarket, when you bump into someone filling shelves because costlier night-shift work has been axed, or when your favourite brand is no longer there because the range has been reduced to cut warehouse costs.
It is in disappointing new clothes that bobble after one wear, or when you book a holiday only to have your flight rescheduled, or find you now have to pay for your food and drink on board. Then, when you try to get your money back or complain, you find the only route is via a web chat with an entity that may or may not be human.
Illustration: Nick Moffatt/The GuardianThe Planet Money podcast made by US radio producer NPR came up with the term in 2021. It is a ''stealth-ninja kind of inflation'', it said, where consumers ''pay the same or more for services but they kinda suck compared with what they used to be''. It used the example of the Magic Kingdom, where visitors were walking nearly a mile to get into Disney World and Disneyland because the tram service from the car park was not running.
To be fair, with the impact of the pandemic and the economy teetering on the edge of recession, this is a difficult time for businesses as well as consumers. For every big corporation with deep pockets like Disney, there is a small company struggling to survive. They got through Covid only to be hit by soaring energy and materials prices, plus staff shortages, when the world got back to normal. As customers struggle with rising living costs, firms must choose between passing on their increased expenses, taking a hit to profits (if they are making any), or replacing parts or services with something cheaper.
''I always assumed that was the [high-street] model with socks,'' says David Blanchflower, professor of economics at Dartmouth college, and a former member of the Bank of England's monetary policy committee, when asked about the idea. ''I remember it from many years ago: the price of socks remained the same and, as costs changed, the thickness of the sock changed. I don't know how big a deal it [skimpflation] is '... I'd ask a different question: to what extent does inflation measure things properly?''
For most of his economics career, Cole believed that official statistics made inflation seem worse than it really was because it was so hard for the data to capture improvements in the quality of products. Now he thinks the official statistics are failing to show how bad inflation actually is.
He argues that skimpflation becomes more prevalent when it's hard to produce things or the world is getting poorer. ''Usually, the world is getting richer, so you see goods and services getting fancier. But the Covid-19 pandemic made us poorer and less productive in many ways, forcing cutbacks.''
It is also more prevalent in a ''seller's market'', like today, he says. ''That's an environment where more money is moving about the economy, and there are many willing buyers for scarce goods and services. Contrast this with a 2008-2011-style economy, where buyers with cash seem to have the upper hand in transactions, and sellers or workers seem to have little bargaining power. In 2008-2011, money was much less plentiful, and the whole world was a 'buyer's market', if you could afford to be a buyer.
''If the amount of money moving around is higher, but production hasn't increased, then it stands to reason you'll get less for your money. Some firms do this by charging you more, but others do this by skimping on their product a bit.''
All producers are looking at ingredients and thinking: Can we use something cheaper to do the same job?Due to high energy costs and other issues, food costs were already climbing before the war in Ukraine. This inflation has to be paid for, says Jason Bull of West Yorkshire-based ingredients firm Eurostar Commodities, who says companies are trying to find cheaper recipes. ''All producers are looking at ingredients and thinking: 'Can we use something cheaper to do the same job '' a different flour, or a different starch, to mitigate the rising costs of ingredients and freight,''' he says.
Changing the recipe may mean the price won't change but Bull says the quality and taste can. ''Food producers want to give the people the ability to afford a healthy and varied diet. However, there's a real risk people will be eating less nutritious food.''
His view is echoed by Andrew Selley, chief executive of Bidfood, a large UK food wholesaler, who last month warned that soaring food costs meant ''difficult decisions for school caterers''. ''Either they are going to serve smaller portions or use cheaper ingredients, which isn't going to be good for the children.''
Higher food prices are a massive headache in the hospitality trade, too, with restaurants forced to resort to ''menu engineering'' (the technical term for using cheaper ingredients) to make the maths work for each dish. This happens all the time but is particularly relevant now due to ''crazy'' price rises, says the restaurant industry consultant Peter Backman.
Illustration: Nick Moffatt/The GuardianIn tough times, a common trick is to cut food sold in slices more thinly and at an angle so it covers more of the plate, or to reduce the amount of pricey meat and fish while introducing more pulses and vegetables, which are cheaper. But Backman says there is ''only so much beef you can replace with lentils before the customer says: 'I ordered beef and not lentils.'''
Where clothes are concerned, experts report that retailers are offsetting higher costs by buying lower-quality fabric or manufacturing them more cheaply. ''The wash-and-wear performance of fabrics that look similar on the hanger can vary a lot,'' says Matthew Easter, who runs school uniform brand Trutex, which competes with ultra-cheap supermarket ranges that he says are made of less hard-wearing fabrics.
That Britons feel shortchanged is apparent in the snapshot of sentiment provided by the Customer Satisfaction Index, published by the Institute of Customer Service (ICS). Its most recent update showed customer service complaints at a record high, with the quality, reliability and availability of goods and services the main bugbears.
''The number of customers experiencing a problem with an organisation is at its highest ever level,'' says the ICS's chief executive, Jo Causon. ''When things go wrong, they can go very wrong indeed, causing frustration and distress, especially in the context of significant life events, or for customers who are vulnerable or who are less confident about engaging through digital channels.''
The survey, which polls 10,000 consumers, found 16% of customers had experienced a problem with a brand's service in the past six months. There were fewer complaints about staff but far more about quality issues or items being out of stock.
Skimpflation is a new idea but Cole suggests that economists should pay some attention to it. ''If you see a firm cutting back product quality for the same price, that's a good indication that we are in a 'you get less for your money' regime, where sellers have the power,'' he says.
As for the customers, there's an old saying that springs to mind: let the buyer beware.
Covid-19 Australia: 'Pandemic babies' with no immunity to viruses ending up in ICU | Daily Mail Online
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 16:39
A concerning number of 'pandemic babies' with no immunity to respiratory viruses are ending up seriously ill in ICU.
Doctors have revealed children born during the Covid-19 pandemic are requiring intensive care 'from encountering viruses they haven't come across before', such as influenza, RSV and Covid.
The children had been born and raised when there were virtually no other viruses circulating in Australia, other than Covid-19.
The Children's Hospital at Westmead infectious diseases paediatrician Dr Philip Britton said an analysis of ICU admissions across shows babies are testing positive for influenza and Covid at the same time.
'Over the last month or so, we have seen four times the admissions to hospital for flu in children as for Covid,' Dr Britton told The Daily Telegraph.
Infectious diseases paediatrician Dr Philip Britton said an analysis of ICU admissions across shows babies are testing positive for influenza and Covid at the same time
Dr Britton said five per cent of the children presenting with co-infections were being admitted to ICU, a statistic he described as 'very concerning'.
About half of the children had no pre-existing health conditions, with the elevated number of admissions putting pressure on the hospital system.
Some of the 'pandemic babies' are presenting with inflammation of the chest, brain and heart caused by influenza, Covid, and RSV.
RSV - respiratory syncytial virus - is a major cause of lung infections in children and can lead to pneumonia or bronchiolitis, which is particularly dangerous in young infants.
Severe cases can kill babies and toddlers, whose tiny airways have not yet fully formed and who struggle to cope with the infection.
'Among that group who are previously well '... It's not just a chest infection, some of these children can be impacted with the flu affecting the heart and the brain,' Dr Britton told The Daily Telegraph.
Some of the 'pandemic babies' are presenting with inflammation of the chest, brain and heart caused by influenza, Covid, and RSV.
A warning was sounded about RSV three weeks ago when there were just 355 cases a week in NSW, but three weeks later that has rocketed up to 3,775 in a week.
Around a fifth of those developed the potentially lethal bronchiolitis, with 40 per cent of them ending up in hospital.
Infectious disease researcher Dr John-Sebastian Eden said the triple whammy of RSV, flu and Covid was packing out the emergency department of Sydney's Westmead Children's Hospital.
'There is a widespread three-way outbreak occurring,' he told Daily Mail Australia.
International borders opening up has seen flu come back and new strains of RSV.
'With Covid layered up on top, these are three main viruses which will lead to hospitalisation.'
Potentially lethal respiratory syncytial virus which attacks kids and has no vaccine has exploded in NSW with cases increasing tenfold in just three weeks
During Covid, RSV continued to spread and split into two separate strains in the east and west of the country in the wake of Western Australia's prolonged isolation.
Infectious disease researcher Dr John-Sebastian Eden said the triple whammy of RSV, flu and Covid was packing out the emergency department of Sydney's Westmead Children's Hospital
Researchers were shocked by the sudden rise of the disease in the first year of lockdowns, fuelled by keeping childcare centres open despite Covid restrictions.
'It was something we had never seen before,' said Dr Eden. 'Even in lockdown there was a lot of effort to keep childcare open.
'You only need a small amount of virus to build up a chain of transmission.'
The disease subsided in 2021, but has now bounced back with the current outbreak.
Dr Eden believes cases in NSW have yet to reach their peak, but is now braced for the outbreak to spread nationwide.
He expects the disease to spread across the southern half of the country at similar levels in the coming weeks.
'What happens is where you have an outbreak in NSW and we've got all those people travelling to other states from there, it then feeds outbreaks in other parts,' he said.
The disease subsided in 2021, but has now bounced back with the current outbreak.
HERE'S WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT RSV RSV is normally a winter disease but Covid lockdowns saw an unexpected huge surge in summer cases last year.
Symptoms include a runny nose, cough, reduced feeding and fever. Complications include wheezing and difficulty breathing, which can develop into pneumonia.
RSV - respiratory syncytial virus - is a major cause of lung infections in children and can lead to pneumonia or bronchiolitis, which is particularly dangerous in young infants.
Like Covid, it can be transferred by sneezing and coughing, but unlike Covid, young children are particularly affected by it.
'Most children will recover without needing specialist care in hospital, and children with mild infection can be treated with rest at home,' paediatrician Daniel Yeoh wrote in The Conversation.
'It's the major cause of lung infections in children, commonly causing bronchiolitis.
'Severe cases occasionally lead to death, predominantly in very young infants.
Almost all children have had an RSV infection by the age of two, but infants in their first year of life are more likely to experience severe infections requiring hospitalisation, because their airways are smaller. Babies have also not built up immunity to RSV from previous years.
Dr Yeoh added: 'Treatment for RSV is focused on helping children with their breathing (for example, giving them oxygen) and feeding (for example, administering fluids through a drip).'
There is no vaccine for RSV but several are under development.
Covid Vaccines and Infertility - by KanekoaTheGreat
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 16:38
Germany Germany reported a 13% decline in births between January and March 2022 compared to the same period in 2021.
United Kingdom The United Kingdom reported a 7.7% decline in births with 75,670 births between January and February 2022 compared to 82,042 births during the same period in 2021.
SwitzerlandIn Switzerland, birth rates have also plummeted since the introduction of the covid vaccines.
Taiwan Taiwan reported a 23.2% decline in births in May 2022 compared to the same month in 2021.
Igor Chudov, the author of a popular covid newsletter wrote , ''When expressed in ''sigmas'', units of standard deviation, the 23.24% drop in the birth rate in Taiwan is a 26-sigma event ! This is can be described as ''unimaginable'' in terms of the likelihood of happening due to random chance.''
Sweden Sweden, without lockdown and school closures, reported a 6.6% decline with 35,454 births between January and April 2022 compared to 37,950 births during the same period in 2021.
The decline in birth rates is 6.9% for that same time period when compared to the average of 2019-2021.
Netherlands Netherlands reported a 6.3% decline with 53,090 births between January and April 2022 compared to 56,671 births during the same period in 2021.
Share
In conclusion, data from around the world shows a substantial monthly decrease in birth rates from January 2022 to April 2022 compared to previous years.
Biodistribution studies show that Pfizer's mRNA vaccine lipid nanoparticles do end up in the ovaries and testes and subsequent studies have shown that covid-19 and covid vaccines lower sperm counts.
Furthermore, the rate of fertility problems reported on the CDC's VAERS database for the covid vaccines are astronomical.
Prior to the introduction of the mRNA vaccines, there were about 1,500 reports of fertility problems over the 31-year history of VAERS for all vaccines combined.
There are 15,000 reports of fertility issues from the covid vaccine alone, which accounts for 95% of all the fertility issues in the history of VAERS.
In the United Kingdom, there are more than 30,000 reports of menstrual changes after covid vaccinations.
Why are birth rates plummeting in the United Kingdom, Germany, Sweden, Netherlands, Switzerland, and Taiwan '-- nine months after the beginning of covid mass vaccinations?
Children are statistically at-or-near zero risk of being hospitalized or dying from covid-19.
The mass vaccination of children must stop now.
THE DOWNLOAD:Pfizer's History of Fraud, Corruption, and Using Nigerian Children as 'Human Guinea Pigs': More than twenty examples of Pfizer bribing doctors and medical professionals, blackmailing foreign countries, manipulating studies, and fraudulently promoting drugs. Read more.
The Pfizer Presentation That Got Dr. Malone Kicked Off Twitter: Pfizer's own vaccine trial data shows an INCREASED risk of all-cause illness and death for the vaccinated. Pfizer unblinded the trial, did not track any subclinical biomarkers, skipped testing of 3,410 participants with covid-19 symptoms, and reported a 12-year-old girl who had been paralyzed to a wheelchair as ''functional abdominal pain''. Read more.
Dr. Clare Craig Exposes How Pfizer Twisted Their Clinical Trial Data for Young Children: 3,000 of 4,526 children did not complete the trial for children aged six months to four years old. Pfizer ignored 97% of the covid that occurred during the trial and compared three children in the vaccine arm to seven in the placebo arm. Read more.
Pfizer's Covid-19 Vaccine Documents Counter "Safe And Effective" Narrative: 9-pages of side effects, 158,893 adverse events, 42,086 case reports, 1,223 fatalities in Pfizer's first three months and a record death rate among American millennials during the second half of 2021. Read more.
Infertility: A Diabolical Agenda: CHD Films Presents '-- The chilling, harrowing story of how a World Health Organization (WHO) population control experiment, under the guise of a vaccination program, resulted in the sterilization of millions of women in Africa without their knowledge or consent. Watch here.
Japan urges 37 million people to switch off lights - BBC News
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 16:34
By Annabelle LiangBusiness reporter
Image source, Getty ImagesJapan's government has urged people in Tokyo and its surrounding area to use less electricity on Monday, as it warned that supplies will be strained as the country faces a heatwave.
The Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry expects demand for power to be "severe" this afternoon local time.
It said people should switch off unnecessary lights but still use air conditioning to avoid heatstroke.
For weeks, officials have warned of a power crunch as temperatures rise.
Over the weekend, the temperature in central Tokyo rose above 35C, while the city of Isesaki, northwest of the capital, saw a record 40.2C. That was the highest temperature ever recorded in June for Japan.
June marks the start of summer in Japan, with temperatures typically staying below 30C during the month.
In a statement on Sunday, the ministry said that excess generating capacity for electricity was expected to drop to 3.7% on Monday afternoon in Tokyo and eight surrounding prefectures. It views a buffer of 3% as necessary for stable power supply.
The government asked people to turn off unnecessary lights for three hours from 15:00 Tokyo time (07:00 BST) while "properly using air conditioning and hydrating during hot hours".
Although electricity providers are working to increase supply, the ministry said the situation was "unpredictable" as temperatures climb.
"If there is an increase in demand and sudden supply troubles, the reserve margin will fall below the minimum required of 3%," it said.
Japan's power supply has been tight since an earthquake in its northeastern region in March forced some nuclear power plants to suspend operations.
Officials have also closed several aging fossil fuel plants in an attempt to cut carbon dioxide emissions.
These issues, along with a surge in demand for electricity, have resulted in a power squeeze.
Earlier this month, the Japanese government called on households and companies to save as much electricity as possible during the summer.
Meanwhile, Japanese public broadcaster NHK reported that 46 people in Tokyo had been taken to hospital for suspected heatstroke, as of Sunday afternoon.
It also said a 94-year-old man in the nearby Kawagoe city was suspected to have died from the condition.
The news comes after Australian officials urged households in New South Wales - a state which includes the country's biggest city Sydney - to switch off their lights in the face of an energy crisis. Restrictions on the Australian wholesale energy market were lifted late last week.
You may also be interested in:
Media caption, Why are UK energy prices so high?
The Aristocratic Ineptitude of Ursula Von Der Leyen's EU Pandemic Response
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 16:27
Where does the buck stop in the EU? There's been plenty of finger pointing as Europeans try to figure out why their own vaccination efforts lag so far behind much of the rest of the world. In many ways, the EU's failure to produce an adequate supply of its vaccine is the kind of cataclysmic social failure that seems to indict entire regimes, not simply individual actors. No one is powerful enough to produce such a multifaceted failure on their own.
Yet much of the blame and anger has deservedly settled on European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. To oust her, as former European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker recently demanded, would be understandable given her blind trust in free market forces to administer Europe's vaccination efforts and flailing attempts to make up for the resulting shortages.
But it would be a mistake to blame von der Leyen without understanding the broader failures that installed a person with a middling record in such a powerful position in the first place. The ultimate problem with von der Leyen is not that she bungled Europe's vaccine rollout. It's that she obtained her position through a kind of incestuous, image-obsessed politics that made bungling an inevitability.
Germans might have a reputation for being cold and rational, but mothers play a surprisingly large role in the political culture. For the Nazis, motherhood was the most a woman could hope to accomplish. They made Mother's Day a national holiday in Germany and rewarded exemplary mothers with the Mutterkreuz or ''Mother's Cross.'' Mothers were perhaps even more essential to the post-war era, however, when Germany was largely rebuilt by the so-called Tr¼mmerfrauen, women who took their names from the piles of rubble they helped clear and repurpose while their husbands and fathers awaited release from prisoner-of-war camps. In this context, it can hardly be surprising that powerful women are almost inevitably maternal in Germany. German Chancellor Angela Merkel became a notable exception but only because she overcame the burden'--in the form of public criticism and media skepticism'--associated with her childlessness.
Merkel's understanding of this dynamic would be one way of explaining the trust she placed in an unproven regional politician at the beginning of her chancellorship. Von der Leyen certainly seemed the perfect embodiment of motherhood: With seven children of her own, she had already climbed the lower ranks of Germany's political establishment while promoting an image of herself as a kind of supermom, who packed lunchboxes and tended to boo-boos while juggling affairs of state.
Von der Leyen, then-social affairs minister of Lower Saxony, with her seven children and her husband, Heiko von der Leyen, show cookies they baked in Hanover, Germany, on Nov. 11, 2003. JOCHEN LUEBKE/DDP/AFP via Getty Images
Today, the image of the power-mom with a big job and a bigger brood has become commonplace in global politics, especially on the right. Frauke Petry, former leader of Germany's far-right Alternative for Germany party, has been especially conspicuous in using her six children to her political advantage, in ways reminiscent of former U.S. Gov. Sarah Palin, whose five children and ''grizzly mama'' moniker were constantly exploited for political gain when she shared a ticket with then-U.S. Sen. John McCain in 2008.
Von der Leyen, with fewer populist impulses than Petry or Palin, has found ways of investing Germany's politics of motherhood with new substance. Placed by Merkel atop both the ministry for family affairs and the ministry for labor in successive governments, von der Leyen was responsible for introducing new directives intended to bring mothers back into the workforce. Among them were the introduction of Elterngeld, a program that replaces a substantial portion of the salaries of parents who take leave from their jobs to care for their children, and a program that expands public day care programs so they are available to children as young as 12 months old. Both programs have now become so thoroughly a part of public life in Germany that it can be difficult to imagine just how controversial they were when first introduced, but they each came under fire, especially from conservatives who saw them as an affront to traditional family structures and unnecessarily invasive to private life.
Von der Leyen, with her seven children and strong ties within the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), was the perfect person to push through these reforms. She served as an endless example for women's ability to do it all. But another key factor often gets overlooked: her lineage. It should be no surprise that von der Leyen has been adept at exploiting images of youth and family for political ends. She learned at the hands of masters.
Von der Leyen (left) with her father, Ernst Albrecht, pose for a family photo in 1978. IMAGO-IMAGES via Reuters
Von der Leyen was herself one of seven children, though her sister Benita-Eva died tragically in childhood. She was born in Brussels in 1958 to Ernst Albrecht and Heidi Adele Stromeyer. It was a charmed, if difficult, moment in German history. The Wirtschaftswunder made the country Europe's economic engine, and it was coupled with a newfound confidence in Germany's central economic and defensive role in the new world order. There were few more enthusiastic beneficiaries of the rapidly shifting political landscape than the Albrecht family. Albrecht was one of the European Union's first civil servants. He was just 37 years old when he was appointed to the highest civil-service office in the Directorate-General for Competition, where he oversaw the nascent European Union's antitrust operations.
Albrecht grew dissatisfied with life in Brussels, however, and returned to his ancestral home in Hanover, Germany. He was soon elected to the position of minister president (or governor, in U.S. diction) of Lower Saxony, an office he held between 1976 and 1990. Albrecht had a reputation as a politician whose influence exceeded his office, and he was a perennial pick for the CDU's next chancellor. Though he never held any higher office, he and his family were constantly in the limelight. It can hardly be a surprise. The children were blond, beautiful, and talented, and Stromeyer seemed as cool and sovereign in front of the camera as her husband.
Indeed, in some very real ways, Germany still thinks of von der Leyen as Albrecht's little girl. While the childless Merkel gained the nickname ''mutti,'' or mommy, von der Leyen still carries the nickname given to her by her father: ''R¶schen'' or ''Little Rosie.'' To reduce von der Leyen to her father's daughter, as one does when one calls her ''R¶schen,'' is to overlook the fact that she has far exceeded his political accomplishments. It's a terrible nickname. A better nickname might have been, ''die h¼bsche.'' It means ''the pretty one'' in everyday parlance, so it might hardly seem an improvement in terms of misogyny. But it also has another history. In Hanover, the ''h¼bsche Familien'' were quasi-noble families who had special access to the court. The Albrecht family have held this status'--and key positions in German politics'--for more than 500 years.
Contemporary Germany doesn't seem like a place where aristocratic titles and family lineages hold much sway'--publicly, Germans are deeply committed to democratic culture and have minimal interest in the kinds of aristocratic trappings that still seem to capture British hearts. Yet the aristocracy have managed to maintain far more of both its economic and political privileges than is commonly recognized. Indeed, the Social Democratic Party's youth committee proposed legislation to ban the adoption of noble titles as parts of last names; had they succeeded, the president of the European Commission would have had to drop the noble title she took when she married her husband, and she would now simply be called Ursula Leyen. The demand was not empty. Many nobles still move in an elite world, where titles can have a real effect on a person's chances of career success and where bloodlines still trump accomplishments as a measure of a person's worth.
Although it would be foolhardy to think von der Leyen could have achieved everything she has without political talents of her own, it's also important to recognize she has always been granted a kind of privilege that far surpasses the parochial advantages accorded to average Germans. Von der Leyen's family tree traces a legacy of power and brutality, incorporating not only some of Germany's most significant Nazis but also some of Britain's largest slave traders and, through marriage, some of the United States' largest slave owners. Von der Leyen is descended directly from James Ladson, who owned more than 200 slaves when the Civil War broke out.
It might seem petty to condemn someone for their ancestry: The sins of the father, after all, shall not be visited on the son'--or, in this case, the daughter. But von der Leyen herself has invoked these forefathers unapologetically, if unthinkingly. When von der Leyen was in college and a group of radical, left-wing terrorists called the Red Army Faction (RAF) went on a violent crime spree, Albrecht, concerned his family would become a target of the RAF, implored his beloved R¶schen to study abroad. She enrolled at the London School of Economics under the name Rose Ladson. Few people at the time were as conscious of the lingering legacies of slavery as we have now become, but her choice to assume the name of her slave-holding ancestors was an indication nevertheless about her comfort with unchallenged and inherited privilege.
Von der Leyen displays her dressage skills at the International Dressage and Jumping Festival in Verden, Germany, on Aug. 4, 2007. Von der Leyen is an avid rider. Sean Gallup/Getty Images
Even if von der Leyen was a little more reflective about her ancestry, it would be necessary to point out the ruling classes that emerged centuries ago continue, at least in some cases, to hold undue influence on European politics. The kinds of family trees that seem to include a shameful number of moral transgressions are still revered by much of the continent's ruling elite. It's no accident that French President Emmanuel Macron is commonly cited as having first suggested von der Leyen for the leadership position, citing her perfect French'--the French she learned as a child when her father was in Brussels'--as evidence of her cosmopolitan nature. But there are any number of Europeans who speak excellent French, and Macron complimented more than her pronunciation. At a press conference, Macron praised her ''profoundly European culture'' before going on to say ''she has the DNA of the European community,'' referring explicitly to her father's important role in Europe's bureaucratic apparatus more than 40 years earlier.
However, it's not only that von der Leyen's name and connections have provided her with a kind of aristocratic sheen. Family was always crucial to her political trajectory. She catapulted through the ranks of local government in Lower Saxony largely because she could call her father's former allies into line in the service of Christian Wulff, the minister president of Lower Saxony when von der Leyen began her career there in 2003 at the age of 45. These connections, and the milieu in which they were established, were the precondition of von der Leyen's political maternity. Indeed, the power of her connections is evident in the story of how she gained her first regional seat.
Her own home in the tiny Hanover suburb of Ilten was represented by regional CDU chairperson J¼rgen Gans¤uer, so she decided to try her political hand in her hometown of Burgdorf, even though that seat had been held for almost 15 years by a CDU politician named Lutz von der Heide. The first primary, which she won by a single vote, was thrown out on a technicality. Her father jumped into action, and with Wilfried Hasselmann, then the honorary chair of the CDU in Hanover, he went on a charm offensive. Meanwhile, the regional edition of the powerful tabloid Bild started a smear campaign against von der Heide. Though von der Heide had held the seat for more than a decade and was, by all accounts, a skilled politician, she won with two-thirds of the votes.
This combination of high political connections and low-brow slander is typical of the family's political style. Albrecht, with his photogenic family and conservative values, had always been a favorite of the paper. Von der Leyen surpassed him. For years, she wrote a column for the tabloid, which is easily the most powerful in Germany. Her political convictions played a secondary role. Indeed, many of the columns seem as though they might be ad copy for some strange German cousin of J.Crew'--the images of the family relaxing, riding, and playing music together could hardly have been more carefully staged had the family been modeling the latest in seersucker and chambray rather than advocating for their particular brand of politics.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel and von der Leyen, then-minister of work and social issues, vote during the Christian Democratic Union party convention in Hanover, Germany, on Dec. 4, 2012. Sean Gallup/Getty Images
It's unsurprising that von der Leyen's successes at the labor and family ministries served to make her, for a time, Merkel's natural successor as leader of the CDU. The policies'--despite some complaints about inequities across social classes'--were widely popular on the left while von der Leyen herself was widely popular among German centrists. Her next job, as Germany's defense minister, would have been a natural stepping stone to the top job; Helmut Schmidt had already gone from that position to the German chancellorship in prior decades. When von der Leyen entered office in 2013, Merkel had already been chancellor for eight years, and it seemed likely that von der Leyen, after a tenure leading the German military, would replace her.
But von der Leyen's career floundered at the defense ministry in ways that foreshadowed her failures in Brussels'--and were entirely in keeping with her earlier successes. The ministries of family and labor are important sites of policy development, and they allowed von der Leyen to flaunt her considerable skill at redistributing tax money in ways that represented the needs of German families. But the managerial challenges of the defense ministry are of an entirely different order. It wasn't just that von der Leyen had never previously shown an interest in security policy. At her earlier posts, von der Leyen primarily led small teams of loyal deputies; at defense, she suddenly was the boss of hundreds of thousands of people and responsible for an annual budget of more than $48 billion. In her many earlier successes, she never demonstrated a particular skill at overseeing the sort of massive global logistic problems the military confronts every day as a matter of course'--or even at navigating the internal dynamics of complex organizations like the Bundeswehr, Germany's armed forces.
Unsurprisingly, perhaps, one of her first reforms at the defense ministry involved the creation of army day care centers (or ''Kitas''). Here, again, the kinds of care work von der Leyen supported were critically important, both societally and militarily. Germany abandoned mandatory military service just a few years before von der Leyen began to serve as defense secretary, and the army was in the midst of adjusting to its new, fully professional status. The Kitas was only one of several measures von der Leyen introduced to make the army more family friendly. She also attempted to tie soldiers' leaves to school breaks, allow soldiers to work part time while still progressing in their careers, and limit the number of relocations soldiers with families had to endure. One shouldn't underestimate the importance of these measures; not only were they crucial to maintaining a standing army, but there is also reason to believe a more family-friendly military is less susceptible to right-wing extremism than one that relies on a more traditional model of the family.
But if von der Leyen's powerful connections, aristocratic comportment, and media savvy were enough to carry her through stints leading Germany's ministries of family and labor, they failed her in her role as the head of Germany's military. Can it be any surprise, really, that a person who had neither any previous experience in defense policy or strategy nor substantial experience managing large organizations in the private or public sectors should fail in such a complex and varied role?
Von der Leyen, then-defense minister, visits the German sailing training ship Gorch Fock at a shipyard in Bremerhaven, Germany, on June 21, 2019. Fabian Bimmer/REUTERS
Von der Leyen held the post as defense minister from 2013 to 2019, a remarkable run considering her inexperience. But when things came crashing down, they came crashing down quickly'--and exposed a slew of mismanagement, incompetence, and potential corruption. The scandal is usually called the ''consultant affair'' due to the untold hundreds of millions of dollars von der Leyen and her chief deputy Katrin Suder paid to consultants who were responsible for helping to determine how the military should spend its substantial armaments budget. In actuality, however, it was really problems with procurement that led to von der Leyen's political downfall in Germany. And it was no accident that it was as minister of defense that von der Leyen encountered issues with procurement. It's the complexity of the Bundeswehr's expenses'--and the ubiquity of lobbyists'--that have long turned the powerful position into a pitfall. Germany's ministries of labor and of family deal with a relatively small number of vendors, and much of their time is spent procuring items familiar with everyday life. There are, of course, more complicated challenges in both of these ministries as well, but nothing that approaches the difficulty of supplying a modern army. Von der Leyen failed at it in a truly spectacular manner.
The Gorch Fock, a sailing ship'--with sails!'--the German Navy used for training was docked for repairs in 2015, briefly before von der Leyen assumed office. The estimated cost was $11.6 million. When she left office in 2019, the estimated cost of repairing the training vessel had risen to $163 million. The mission-critical components of von der Leyen's armament expenditures fared even worse. In 2017, according to N-TV, 97 new weapons systems were delivered to the Bundeswehr. Only 38 were functional.
Furthermore, von der Leyen and Suder deleted cell phone data and censored documents in ways that raised the suspicions of experts. Their evasions were so extreme that Tobias Lindner, who is the Green Party's defense expert in the Bundestag, asked prosecutors to investigate von der Leyen for potential criminal wrongdoing. ''It goes beyond a political dispute,'' Lindner told the S¼ddeutsche Zeitung in 2019. ''She's made clearing up the case much more difficult and might be criminally liable.''
Von der Leyen talks with French President Emmanuel Macron prior to the start of the EU summit in Brussels on July 18, 2020, the first face-to-face summit of EU leaders during the pandemic. FRANCISCO SECO/POOL/AFP via Getty Images
Everyone was largely willing to overlook von der Leyen's fundamental dilettantism when she was advocating for more social support for working mothers. And it remains a remarkable testimony to the shared experiences of mothers in different situations'--as well as to von der Leyen's solidarity with other German mothers'--that the reforms she introduced to help women balance career and family have been so wildly successful.
It's lamentable, however, that Macron and the rest of the European Commission were so dazzled by von der Leyen's extraordinarily embodiment of ''European culture'' that they refused to listen to the warnings of Germans who knew how badly she bungled her last major procurement effort. Indeed, Germans mistrusted her so badly that her appointment to lead the European Union was largely greeted with skepticism in the country, although she is the first German to hold the office since Walter Hallstein in 1958.
What's remarkable is not that she has failed so badly in the position. She rose, after all, by playing on her family connections. What is, however, remarkable is she has failed in so nearly the same way as in her last two positions. Running the Bundeswehr, she entrusted the army's procurement efforts to neoliberal market logic espoused by management consultants, and things went poorly. A few years later, responsible for Europe's vaccine procurement efforts, she has faced criticism for placing too much trust in the free market, failing to insist on centralized control of vaccine production and distribution within the European Union. As a result, people are dying.
For any other politician, one suspects it would have been a career-ending mistake. But the world works differently for von der Leyen, and the press has already largely moved on from her disastrous mismanagement of Europe's vaccine procurement efforts. She is one of the h¼bsche, Germany's privileged few.
Correction, May 3, 2021: An earlier version of this article incorrectly identified a former defense minister.
The whispers of Hillary Clinton 2024 have started - CNNPolitics
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 16:26
(CNN)In the immediate aftermath of the Supreme Court's monumental decision to overturn Roe v Wade, conservative writer John Ellis took to the internet to make a provocative case: It was time for Hillary Clinton to make a(nother) political comeback.
"Now is her moment,"
he wrote. "The Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe vs. Wade creates the opening for Hillary Clinton to get out of stealth mode and start down the path toward declaring her candidacy for the 2024 Democratic presidential nomination."
Ellis' argument is centered on the ideas that 1) President Joe Biden, who will be 82 shortly after the 2024 election, is simply too old to run again (Ellis is far from the only person
making that case) and 2) The Democratic bench is not terribly strong
He's not the only person eyeing a Clinton re-emergence.
Writing in The Hill newspaper, Democratic pundit Juan Williams makes the case that Clinton should become a major figure on the campaign trail this year.
"Clinton is exactly the right person to put steel in the Democrats' spine and bring attention to the reality that 'ultra-MAGA' Republicans, as President Biden calls them, are tearing apart the nation,"
Williams writes, adding: "Keep talking and talk louder, Hillary!"
So, just how far-fetched is a Clinton candidacy?
Well, start here: That a conservative writer is leading the charge -- at least at the moment -- for another presidential bid by Clinton should be looked at with some healthy skepticism. No candidate unites the Republican party -- even with Donald Trump as the GOP's likely nominee -- like Clinton does. So, this may be a bit of wishful thinking by Ellis. Keep that in mind.
Then go to this: Biden is giving every indication that, even at his advance age, he is planning to run again. The New York Times posted a piece Monday night headlined "Biden Irked by Democrats Who Won't Take 'Yes' for an Answer on 2024" that included these lines:
"Facing intensifying skepticism about his capacity to run for re-election when he will be nearly 82, the president and his top aides have been stung by the questions about his plans, irritated at what they see as a lack of respect from their party and the press, and determined to tamp down suggestions that he's effectively a lame duck a year and a half into his administration."
And finish here: Clinton has been pretty close to
Shermanesque in her denials about even considering another bid.
"No, out of the question," Clinton said of another presidential candidacy in an
interview with the Financial Times earlier this month. "First of all, I expect Biden to run. He certainly intends to run. It would be very disruptive to challenge that."
In an interview with CBS Tuesday morning, Clinton said she couldn't "imagine" running again. Host Gayle King rightly noted that Clinton's answer wasn't a definitive "no."
So, if you are a betting person -- and, of course,
there are odds on Hillary running -- the smart gamble is that Clinton doesn't run again.
With all of that said, we know that circumstances change. And that changed circumstances can lead to changed minds.
While I find it utterly implausible that Clinton would run against Biden in a primary in 2024, I also think that an open nomination -- if Biden takes a pass on running -- would be something that would be hard for Clinton to not at least look at. That's not to say she would run. It's only to say that her name would get bandied about if the seat was open. That's a lock.
Then there's the Roe decision to consider. Clinton's comments about not running again came before Roe was decided. As someone who has fought for women's rights throughout her career as first lady, US senator and secretary of state, might the Supreme Court's ruling have changed her calculus somewhat as she looks to her own future?
Again, the chances are very slim that Clinton runs again. But they aren't zero.
WH reporters frustrated by Karine Jean-Pierre press briefings, 'lack of news' may lower attendance: Report | Fox News
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 15:50
NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!
White House reporters are allegedly growing frustrated with how White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre has been conducting the daily press briefings.
Politico's "West Wing Playbook" newsletter offered a scathing assessment of Jean-Pierre's "tough debut" since she took the helm of the White House podium following the exit of Jen Psaki, calling it a "rocky first month."
The report claims her answers to questions have "baffled reporters" and "even made some of her White House colleagues wince."
KARINE JEAN-PIERRE: 10 THINGS TO KNOW ABOUT THE NEW WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY
Playbook pointed to the RNC's Twitter account that frequently targets Jean-Pierre as a "useful punching bag," which similarly occurred under Psaki's tenure in the briefing room.
The report highlighted instances where the press secretary appeared to be caught off guard like when Interior Secretary Deb Haaland just days after being in close contact with Biden or when the president made a questionable claim about how he was "appointed" to the Naval Academy.
Press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre holds the daily press briefing at the White House, June 16, 2022. (Reuters/Evelyn Hockstein)
"Reporters were confused by her refusal to answer questions at a recent briefing about the last time the president had been tested for Covid-19, something her predecessor regularly disclosed," the Playbook wrote. "Press secretaries can't possibly keep tabs on every story line, so it's not unusual for them to acknowledge when they don't know the answer and pledge to find more information after the briefing. But that has been a more common response for Jean-Pierre in her first weeks than her predecessor."
KARINE JEAN-PIERRE MOCKED FOR 'FREUDIAN SLIP:' STARTED TO SAY BIDEN WILL 'ELEVATE' PAIN AT THE PUMP
Politico found that "in her first 10 briefings as press secretary, Jean-Pierre said she didn't have the information being sought 20-plus times more than predecessor Jen Psaki in her first 10 briefings," according to transcripts.
"And while White House reporters love to complain about non-answers from communications officials, many have privately grumbled that when Jean-Pierre does have answers, they are often vague and rarely stray from the pre-written talking points prepared in the binder at the podium," Playbook wrote.
White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre speaks during the daily briefing May 18, 2022. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
One White House reporter told Politico, "At a certain point it wouldn't surprise me if people started voting with their feet," suggesting briefing attendance could dwindle among reporters for the "lack of news" that comes from the podium.
Another reporter said to Politico, "She is so focused on not making a mistake that she doesn't let herself speak freely," adding, "A lot of her responses end up becoming'... it appears that she's reading from a page."
JOY BEHAR ASKS KARINE JEAN-PIERRE HOW TO CONVINCE AMERICANS INFLATION, GAS PRICES ARE 'NOT JOE BIDEN'S FAULT'
The newsletter alleged that allies of Jean-Pierre and Black communications officials both in and outside the Biden administration "feel White House leadership has set her up to fail" with the constant presence of John Kirby, who recently transitioned to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. after being Biden's Pentagon spokesman, to take the lead on foreign policy questions in the briefing room.
Karine Jean-Pierre speaks during a news conference at the White House on June 15, 2022. (Ting Shen/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
A White House official took a swipe at Politico's report, telling Fox News, "If you work at a place called 'Politico' and you think it's noteworthy that the RNC or DNC is attacking a press secretary from the other party, you have some reading to do."
In a statement to Fox News, White House press secretary Andrew Bates said, "As Karine said when she was announced as Press Secretary, she's here precisely because of her respect for the indispensable role of the free press in our democracy."
"She is proud of her briefings '-- which often run longer than the modern average and have included multiple Saturday gaggles. She loves the back and forth with the White House press corps, and her door is always open for any feedback its members are interested in giving directly," Bates added.
Fox News also reached out to Jean-Pierre for comment.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
The Biden administration touted the appointment of Karine Jean-Pierre as the first Black and openly-gay White House press secretary. Psaki officially left the podium in May and has since joined MSNBC as a contributor and a host on the Peacock streaming service.
Joseph A. Wulfsohn is a media reporter for Fox News Digital. Story tips can be sent to joseph.wulfsohn@fox.com and on Twitter: @JosephWulfsohn.
Former Jan. 6 Key Witness Unexpectedly Dies Hours Before Special Hearing, Had Warned of 'Professional Agitators'
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 15:12
News By Andrew Jose June 28, 2022 at 4:18pm The U.S. Senate sergeant-at-arms who oversaw Senate security during the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol incursion died Monday at 71.
News of former U.S. Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Michael Stenger's death was first reported by Politico.
Stenger, a veteran of the Marine corps, had served for 35 years in the Secret Service before joining the Senate Sergeant-at-Arms team in 2011, according to Politico.
During his time with the SAA team, Stenger had worked on matters related to security and continuity before his promotion as former Sergeant-at-Arms Drew Willison's deputy. In 2018, Stenger became Sergeant-at-Arms.
Stenger helped ensure the smooth functioning of the Senate during the last three years of former President Donald Trump's administration.
His responsibilities ranged from overseeing the technological needs of the upper chamber of Congress and also serving as its chief law enforcement officer tasked with managing its security.
Stenger resigned from his duties as Sergeant-at-Arms a day after Jan. 6, 2021, Daily Mail reported.
During the time of his resignation, Stenger faced criticism over how he managed the situation during the time of the incursion, according to the outlet.
When the New York Post had reached out to Stenger's home in Falls Church, Virginia, on Tuesday morning, a woman answered the call.
Does Stenger's death seem suspicious to you?
Yes: 93% (5589 Votes)
No: 7% (415 Votes)
''The family is not here, it's nobody's business,'' the lady said, refusing the Post's request for comment on Stenger's death. ''It has nothing to do with Jan. 6 at all.''
Stenger's death came a day before the Jan. 6 Committee's Tuesday surprise witness hearing, where the committee heard Cassidy Hutchinson, a former aide to Trump's Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, testify.
During the hearing, Hutchinson, among her other claims, alleged that Trump knew that some among the crowd at the Capitol were calling for former Vice President Mike Pence to be hanged, according to reporting from NPR.
Hutchinson claimed that she heard Meadows respond to reports of the crowd calling for violence against Pence by saying that Trump thought Pence deserved it.
Other allegations Hutchinson made included claims that Trump grabbed the steering vehicle of the presidential limousine and demanded that he be taken to the Capitol when the incursion was occurring, NPR reported.
Stenger had also testified before Congress on the events that transpired on Jan. 6, 2021.
During a February 2021 hearing with the Senate Homeland Security Committee, Stenger had called for the investigation of the role of ''professional agitators'' during the incursion, Daily Mail reported.
''There is an opportunity to learn lessons from the events of Jan. 6,'' Stenger told the committee, according to the outlet.
''Investigations should be considered as to funding and travel of what appears to be professional agitators,'' Stenger said.
''First Amendment rights should always be considered in conjunction with professional investigations.''
SummaryMore Biographical Information Recent Posts ContactAndrew Jose is a freelance reporter covering security, U.S. politics, and foreign policy, among other beats. He has bylines in several outlets, notably the Daily Caller, Jewish News Syndicate, and the Times of Israel.
Andrew Jose is a freelance reporter covering security, U.S. politics, and foreign policy, among other beats. He has bylines in several outlets, notably the Daily Caller, Jewish News Syndicate, and the Times of Israel. Speak to Andrew securely via ajoseofficial@protonmail.com. Follow Andrew on Twitter: @realAndrewJose
Education
Georgetown University, School of Foreign Service
Languages Spoken
English, Spanish, Tamil, Hindi, French
Topics of Expertise
Security, Economics, Open Source Intelligence, International Politics
Facebook's Audit Director AND Marketing Leads Are Former Pfizer Directors.
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 15:11
Facebook '' a platform that routinely censors posts critical of COVID-19 vaccines '' has hired several alumni from Pfizer's marketing and internal audit teams to lead similar efforts at the social media platform, The National Pulse can reveal.
The hires appear to present a conflict of interest for the social media platform, which has come under fire for censoring and banning users who've posted about the side effects or questioned the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines.
Facebook's Internal Audit Director, for example, was formerly a Senior Director at Pfizer. The employee '' Tiffany Stokes '' has held the influential position at Facebook since January 2020.
''Build and own strong relationships with critical business partners, provide project oversight of operational audits, manage internal audit plan and risk assessment,'' she lists as part of her job description on her LinkedIn profile. ''Leadership requires close collaboration with the Sales, Partnerships, Global Operations, International, HR, and Legal teams to assess and prioritize risks across an ever-changing high-tech business landscape,'' she adds.
Prior to joining Facebook, Stokes worked at COVID-19 vaccine maker Pfizer for five years as the Senior Director of its finance and legal operations.
''Established and managed legal, budgeting, and forecasting processes to achieve the business's financial goals as well as cost control commitments made to shareholders and the financial and investment community,'' she summarized her position.
Prior to serving in this role, which she also notes required her to ''adjust financial forecasts based on fluctuating costs, prioritization of legal matters, and impending legal issues,'' she worked as the pharmaceutical giant's Assistant Treasurer for the U.S. and Capital Markets, where she ''directed'' the company's $8 billion investment portfolio.
The National Pulse can also reveal that a Facebook Vice President for Global Clients and Categories was formerly Pfizer's Chief Marketing Officer for consumer healthcare in the U.S. The employee, Brian Groves, worked at Pfizer for a total of 14 years before joining Facebook as a Director of its Global Accounts.
Similarly, a former Director for Digital Marketing and Innovation at Pfizer joined Facebook as a Client Partner for its Global Marketing Solutions branch in 2018.
In addition to Facebook hiring Pfizer marketing team alumni, the platform also added Pfizer's former Senior Public Affairs and Corporate Communications Project Manager as its own Corporate Communications Manager in 2019.
The unearthed personnel links between Pfizer and Facebook follow the social media platform deploying its third-party ''fact-checkers'' '' who have deep ties to Democratic politics and the Chinese Communist Party '' to brand COVID-19 studies and articles at odds with mainstream narrative as ''disinformation.''
Fuel Purchases Directly Within Apple CarPlay to Be Available This Fall - MacRumors
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 14:45
Drivers will be able to preauthorize fuel purchases directly within Apple CarPlay starting this fall (via Reuters).
The feature, first mentioned in a developer session at WWDC earlier this month, will allow 'ŒCarPlay'Œ users to use apps to navigate to a pump and preauthorize a fuel purchase. Fuel companies will offer individual apps that users will need to install on their iPhone to be available in Apple 'ŒCarPlay'Œ. Entering payment credentials in the 'ŒiPhone'Œ app ahead of time will allow users to activate a pump and quickly purchase fuel directly from the 'ŒCarPlay'Œ UI.
Gasoline firm HF Sinclair told Reuters that it plans to adopt the new 'ŒCarPlay'Œ functionality. "We are excited by the idea that consumers could navigate to a Sinclair station and purchase fuel from their vehicle navigation screen," Jack Barger, the company's senior vice president of marketing said. Likewise, P97 Networks CEO Donald Frieden told Reuters that he has taken calls from oil companies that want to make their apps available in 'ŒCarPlay'Œ.
Apple has opened up more app categories for 'ŒCarPlay'Œ over time, such as parking, electric vehicle charging, and food ordering. Driving task apps for logging business trip mileages will also become available alongside fuel apps later this year. Fuel purchase apps will be available in Apple 'ŒCarPlay'Œ when iOS 16 officially launches in the fall.
Popular Stories
M2 13-Inch MacBook Pro With 256GB SSD Appears Slower Than Equivalent M1 in Real-World Speed TestsBenchmark testing has indicated that the 256GB variant of the 13-inch MacBook Pro with M2 chip offers slower SSD performance than its M1 equivalent, and now real-world stress testing by YouTuber Max Yuryev of Max Tech suggests that the 256GB SSD in the 13-inch MacBook Pro is also underperforming in day-to day-usage.The M2 MacBook Pro with 256GB SSD and 8GB RAM was slower than the M1 MacBook ...
Apple's Upcoming M2 Pro Chip for High-End MacBook Pro and Mac Mini Will Reportedly Be 3nmTSMC will manufacture Apple's upcoming "M2 Pro" and "M3" chips based on its 3nm process, according to Taiwanese industry publication DigiTimes."Apple reportedly has booked TSMC capacity for its upcoming 3nm M3 and M2 Pro processors," said DigiTimes, in a report focused on competition between chipmakers like TSMC and Samsung to secure 3nm chip orders. As expected, the report said TSMC will...
iPhone 11 Pro vs. 14 Pro: New Features to Expect if You've Waited to UpgradeWith many customers choosing to upgrade their iPhone every two or three years nowadays, there are lots of iPhone 11 Pro users who might be interested in upgrading to the iPhone 14 Pro later this year. Those people are in for a treat, as three years of iPhone generations equals a long list of new features and changes to look forward to.Below, we've put together a list of new features and...
15 Years Ago Today, the iPhone Went On SaleFifteen years ago to this day, the iPhone, the revolutionary device presented to the world by the late Steve Jobs, officially went on sale.The first iPhone was announced by Steve Jobs on January 9, 2007, and went on sale on June 29, 2007. "An iPod, a phone, an internet mobile communicator... these are not three separate devices," Jobs famously said. "Today, Apple is going to reinvent the...
Tesla Apple CarPlay Hack Updated to Work With Any Tesla ModelPolish developer Michał GapiÅski has released a new and improved version of his "Tesla Android Project" which brings Apple's CarPlay experience to more Tesla vehicles than ever before.According to GapiÅski, version 2022.25.1 provides "100% functional CarPlay integration for any Tesla," and comes with several new features and bug fixes.The project now supports DRM video playback so that...
Base 13-Inch MacBook Pro With M2 Chip Has Significantly Slower SSD SpeedsFollowing the launch of Apple's new 13-inch MacBook Pro with the M2 chip, it has been discovered that the $1,299 base model with 256GB of storage has significantly slower SSD read/write speeds compared to the equivalent previous-generation model.YouTube channels such as Max Tech and Created Tech tested the 256GB model with Blackmagic's Disk Speed Test app and found that the SSD's read and...
Video Comparison: M2 MacBook Pro vs. M1 MacBook ProApple last week launched an updated version of the 13-inch MacBook Pro, and it is the first Mac that is equipped with an updated M2 chip. As it's using a brand new chip, we thought we'd pick up the M2 MacBook Pro and compare it to the prior-generation M1 MacBook Pro to see just what's new.Subscribe to the MacRumors YouTube channel for more videos. For the video comparison, we're using the...
Apple Executive Says Samsung Copied the iPhone and Simply 'Put a Bigger Screen Around It'The Wall Street Journal's Joanna Stern today shared a new documentary about the evolution of the iPhone ahead of the 15th anniversary of the device launching on June 29, 2007. The documentary includes an interview with Apple's marketing chief Greg Joswiak, iPhone co-creator Tony Fadell, and a family of iPhone users.One segment of the interview reflects on Android smartphones gaining larger...
Gurman: iPhone 14 Pro to Feature Always-On Display Showing iOS 16's New Lock Screen WidgetsiPhone 14 Pro models are widely expected to feature always-on displays that allow users to view glanceable information without having to tap to wake the screen. In the latest edition of his Power On newsletter for Bloomberg, Mark Gurman said the feature will include support for iOS 16's new Lock screen widgets for weather, fitness, and more."Like the Apple Watch, the iPhone 14 Pro will be...
'); }
'); }
California to send stimulus checks of up to $1,050 per family for "inflation relief" - CBS News
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 14:42
What's driving inflation?
What's driving inflation, high gas prices? 07:25 About 23 million California residents will soon receive "inflation relief" checks of up to $1,050 under a budget deal reached by Governor Gavin Newsom and state lawmakers on Sunday.
The checks are part of a $17 billion relief package that will also suspend the state's sales tax on diesel fuel and provide additional aid to help people with rent and utility bills, Newsom and Senate President Pro Tempore Toni G. Atkins and Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon said in a statement.
The agreement comes as California drivers face the highest gasoline prices in the U.S., with the average price for a gallon of gas in the state at $6.32 on Monday '-- or about 29% higher than the national average. Earlier this year, Newsom had proposed sending stimulus checks of $400 per vehicle to state residents, with a cap of two vehicles. But other lawmakers had pushed for a plan that would provide bigger checks to people who earn less.
We have an agreement with the legislature on California's budget!This budget takes immediate actions to give $$ back to millions who are grappling with global inflation and rising costs while tackling some of the greatest challenges of our time.
Here's what you need to know:
'-- Office of the Governor of California (@CAgovernor) June 27, 2022The relief checks are designed to help residents cope with "global inflation and rising prices of everything from gas to groceries," the lawmakers said in the statement. Here's how California's plan will work.
Where is the money coming from?The checks are designed as tax refunds, and stem from the state's record-setting $97 billion budget surplus .
Who will qualify for an inflation-relief check?The payments are similar to the stimulus checks sent by the federal government in that they are based on income, tax-filing status and household size.
Lower- and middle-income Californians stand to receive the biggest checks.
Single taxpayers who earn less than $75,000 a year and couples who file jointly and make less than $150,000 a year will receive $350 per taxpayer. Taxpayers with dependents will receive an extra $350. In other words, a couple that earns a combined $125,000 and has two children would qualify for $350 per adult plus $350 for their children, for a total of $1,050.
What about higher-income Californians?Higher-income residents will receive smaller payments.
Single taxpayers who make between $75,000 and $125,000 a year and couples who earn between $150,000 and $250,000 will receive $250, plus the same payment for their dependents, for a maximum of $750 per family. Single people who earn between $125,000 and $250,000 and couples who earn between $250,000 and $500,000 annually would receive $200 each, plus the same amount for their dependents. That amounts to a maximum payment of $600 per family. How about families who earn more than $500,000?Couple who earn above $500,000 and single taxpayers who earn above $250,000 aren't eligible for the payments, according to the Sacramento Bee.
When will the checks be issued?Checks will be sent via direct deposit or debit cards by late October, according to local station KCRA.
Trending News
In: Stimulus Check California Tax Refund Thanks for reading CBS NEWS.
Create your free account or log in for more features.
Supreme Court: EPA can't set climate standards for power plants
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 14:41
A view of the backside of the U.S. Supreme Court on June 6, 2022 in Washington, DC. According to media reports,
Drew Angerer | Getty Images
The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled the EPA does not have authority to set standards on climate-changing greenhouse gas emissions for existing power plants.
The 6-3 ruling said that Congress, not the Environmental Protection Agency, has that power.
The court's ruling on the case affects the federal government's authority to set standards for planet-warming pollutants like carbon dioxide from existing power plants under the landmark Clean Air Act.
The decision is a major setback for the Biden administration's agenda to combat climate change, specifically the goal to zero out carbon emissions from power plants by 2035 and cut in half the country's emissions by the end of the decade.
The case stems from the EPA's directive in 2015 to coal power plants to either reduce production or subsidize alternate forms of energy. That order was never implemented because it was immediately challenged in court.
Fossil fuel-fired power plants are the second-largest source of pollution in the U.S. behind transportation, according to the EPA. The U.S. is also the second-largest producer of greenhouse gases behind China, making it a key player in global efforts to combat climate change.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, in the case, known as West Virginia v. the Environmental Protection Agency, which was joined by the Supreme Court's other five conservative members.
The decision is the first time a majority opinion explicitly cited the so-called major questions doctrine to justify a ruling. That controversial doctrine holds that with issues of major national significance, a regulatory agency must have clear statutory authorization from Congress to take certain actions, and not rely on its general agency authority.
Roberts wrote, "There is little reason to think Congress assigned such decisions" about the regulations in question to the EPA, despite the agency's belief that "Congress implicitly tasked it, and it alone, with balancing the many vital considerations of national policy implicated in deciding how Americans will get their energy."
"Capping carbon dioxide emissions at a level that will force a nationwide transition away from the use of coal to generate electricity may be a sensible 'solution to the crisis of the day,' " Roberts wrote, "But it is not plausible that Congress gave EPA the authority to adopt on its own such a regulatory scheme."
He added: "A decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body."
Justice Elena Kagan wrote a dissent, which was joined by the court's two other liberals.
"Today, the Court strips the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of the power Congress gave it to respond to 'the most pressing environmental challenge of our time, " Kagan wrote in that dissent.
"The Court appoints itself '-- instead of Congress or the expert agency'--the decisionmaker on climate policy. I cannot think of many things more frightening," Kagan wrote.
She also said, "The majority claims it is just following precedent, but that is not so. The Court has never even used the term 'major questions doctrine' before."
The court's six-justice conservative majority has been skeptical of the federal agency's authority to set national standards.
The legal fighting over the EPA's authority began several years ago when the Obama administration set strict carbon limits for each state in an effort to reduce emissions from power plants, and urged states to meet limits by shifting to cleaner energy alternatives like wind and solar.
The Obama administration's Clean Power Plan was temporarily blocked in 2016 by the Supreme Court and then repealed in 2019 by the Trump administration, which argued that the plan exceeded the EPA's authority under the Clean Air Act. It argued that the act only allowed the agency to set standards on the physical premises of a power plant '-- or "inside the fenceline."
The Trump administration proposed more lenient standards to regulate emissions only from existing coal-fired steam plants, a policy called the Affordable Clean Energy Rule. The revision was challenged by states and environmental groups and ultimately struck down by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Since then, there hasn't been an EPA standard with respect to carbon pollution from existing power plants.
Republican attorneys general led by West Virginia, a major coal producer, along with coal companies and industry groups, pursued the case, arguing that the EPA doesn't have the authority to transition the country to cleaner energy sources and that such authority belongs to Congress.
Lawyers representing the EPA and U.S. utility industry lobby groups pushed back on arguments restricting the agency's authority, arguing that doing so would prompt lawsuits against power providers.
Under the Biden administration, the EPA has indicated that it will not attempt to resurrect the Clean Power Plan, but rather create its own rules to regulate power plant emissions.
But Roberts, in the majority opinion, wrote, "At bottom, the Clean Power Plan essentially adopted a cap-and-trade scheme, or set of state cap-and-trade schemes, for carbon ... Congress, however, has consistently rejected proposals to amend the Clean Air Act to create such a program."
Thursday's decision could rule out the agency's ability to impose a cap-and-trade system, which allows the government to set a maximum on the amount of greenhouse gas emissions released across an industry and penalize parties for violations. Parties then buy and sell the rights to exceed that cap, essentially creating a market around emissions.
This is breaking news. Check back for updates.
NATO to dramatically increase forces on high alert to over 300,000 from 40,000 amid Russia threat | World News | Sky News
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 14:39
NATO will significantly increase the number of forces on high alert to over 300,000 from 40,000 as part of the biggest overhaul of the alliance's defences since the Cold War.
With Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine changing the security environment across Europe, the head of the alliance also confirmed that allies will expand troop deployments in NATO countries that sit closest to Russia.
Ukraine is not a member of NATO.
The decisions will be set out at a landmark summit this week in Madrid.
"Together, this constitutes the biggest overhaul of our collective deterrence and defence since the Cold War," Jens Stoltenberg said, in a briefing at NATO headquarters in Brussels on Monday.
He said the 30-member alliance is expected to consider Russia to be "the most significant and direct threat to our security".
Ukraine news live: War 'turning in Russia's favour' - as Putin to make first foreign trip since invasion
Allies had already hardened their defences following Russia's all-out invasion of Ukraine in February, but the latest steps are by far the most significant.
"We will transform the NATO Response Force and increase the number of our high readiness forces to well over 300,000," the NATO chief said.
The NATO Response Force - which are kept at varying degrees of readiness to mobilise, from two days' notice to six months - is currently around 40,000 soldiers, sailors and air personnel.
Sky News was first to report the increase in forces last week before specific numbers were known.
Mr Stoltenberg also confirmed the strengthening of units deployed across eight eastern and southeastern NATO countries to deter Russia hostilities. They will rise in size from 1,000-strong battlegroups to brigades, which comprise around 3,000-5,000 troops.
Read more:The lessons the MoD is learning from Ukraine and what it means if the UK went to war with RussiaZelenskyy says he wants war over by winter before conditions make fightback more difficult
More war-fighting equipment will be stationed in states such as Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, which are among those that feel most at risk from the Kremlin.
Image: The Vice Admiral Constantin Balescu 274 - as Romanian, British and US maritime NATO forces carry out an exercise named Trojan Footprint in MayThe desire is for NATO to have sufficient forces on the ground to defeat any attempt at an invasion.
This is a fundamental shift from a policy known as a "tripwire" that was adopted after Russia first invaded Ukraine in 2014, with the annexation of Crimea.
Back then, allies agreed to set up four missions in the Baltic states and Poland, each with around 1,000 troops. If Russia chose to invade, these battlegroups would not be able to stop the attack but would trigger a "tripwire", prompting reinforcements to rush in.
However, the events in Ukraine, where Russian forces have wreaked carnage in areas they have occupied, means allies believe they need to deny any invading force from having the ability to take any ground from day one of an attack.
One defence minister has said that there cannot be a "Bucha on NATO soil" - a reference to the town of Bucha, outside Kyiv, where Russian forces are accused of mass murder, torture and rape of Ukrainian civilians.
Several long-planned NATO exercises involving member countries including the UK, and partners, have been taking place over the last few months in many of the nations where troops are to be boosted.
As part of the upgraded defence plans, military personnel tasked with defending specific NATO allies will not all need to be stationed on the ground, but could be based in their home country and only deploy forward when needed.
"These troops will exercise together with home defence forces," Mr Stoltenberg said.
"And they will become familiar with local terrain, facilities, and our new pre-positioned stocks. So that they can respond smoothly and swiftly to any emergency."
The changes will need increased investment, with allies increasing defence spending for the eighth consecutive year - an increase of $350bn since 2014.
As reported by Sky News last week, the NATO chief outlined new support that allies will collectively pledge to give Ukraine, including anti-drone systems and providing Ukrainian forces with secure communication.
In a disappointment for most allies, though, there has been no breakthrough yet on overcoming opposition from Turkey to a historic bid by previously neutral Sweden and Finland to join NATO - in the ultimate snub to Mr Putin and win for the allies.
The NATO chief said he would be talking to the Turkish prime minister and had already spoken with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
He said allies "aim to make progress on Finland and Sweden's historic applications for NATO membership, while ensuring the security concerns of all allies are addressed".
46 Migrants Found Dead in Overheated Tractor Trailer
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 14:36
An aerial view of the abandoned tractor trailer on June 27 in San Antonio, Texas.Photo: Jordan Vonderhaar (Getty Images)
Nearly four dozen migrants were found dead inside of an abandoned tractor trailer just outside of San Antonio yesterday.
Sixteen people were found still alive in the trailer and were transported to a hospital. There were 12 adults and four children, France24 reported . The people in the trailer are migrants from several countries including Mexico, Guatemala and Honduras. The nationality of some of the deceased has not yet been confirmed , according to The New York Times.
Those still alive inside of the trailer were hot to the touch and seemed to be suffering from heat stroke, heat exhaustion and dehydration, CNN reported . There was no water inside of the truck nor any visible air conditioning unit, San Antonio Fire Chief Charles Hood said at a press conference near the grisly scene .
This tragic incident occurred on a day when San Antonio temperatures reached the high 90s to low 100s . San Antonio Police Chief William McManus told The Texas Tribune that this was the deadliest human smuggling incident that he could recall in the city, though it is unfortunately not the only smuggling related death that occurred in the area. Back in July 2017, 10 migrants died inside of a hot tractor-trailer outside of a San Antonio Walmart.
Such deaths could become more common for migrants trying to find their way into the country as areas all across the American Southwest see record breaking daytime and nighttime temperatures . A 2021 study found that dehydration related to heat is one of the main causes of death for migrants crossing through the U.S. Mexico border. Many of the people that make the dangerous trek north carry water and food with them, but oftentimes not enough to offset the harsh conditions that they have to endure. More deaths are to be expected as climate change worsens dry and hot conditions in that region of the country.
Dr. Priscilla Agyemang, a doctor of internal medicine with Columbia Primary Care, about the risk survivors of the incident will face, considering how long they were trapped in the hot trailer. She explained that if the migrants taken to the hospital were conscious, they were likely to be stabilized quickly with the proper treatment.
''I would say a large majority of people have full recovery [from heat exhaustion] depending on the degree of assistance they need afterwards,'' she said. ''Obviously, the older or sicker that you are, it may take longer to recover.''
How Corporate America Uses ESG to Polish Its Image
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 14:26
C oreCivic, the first publicly traded prison company in America and the first to operate both private prisons and private immigration detention centers on a for-profit basis, had another first to announce. Damon T. Hininger, the chief executive, paused to share the news on a call with investors last month: CoreCivic Inc. was the first company after the George Floyd protests to proactively conduct a ''racial equity audit,'' the results of which it was now ready to release.
''CoreCivic is one of the very few companies in the United States that has proactively embraced the process,'' Hininger gloated.
The private prison corporation's stock price and access to bond markets had been battered by pressure over its role in profiting from immigrant detention and for providing financial support to Donald Trump's presidency. The company is currently facing a class-action lawsuit brought by immigration detainees claiming that they were forced to work with little or no pay. The racial equity audit was a conscious effort by CoreCivic not only to mend its poor public image, but also to harness public interest in racial justice to bring the company back into the good graces of Wall Street investors.
The contents of CoreCivic's audit pointed to mostly superficial contributions to diversity and equity. The report, conducted by Moore & Van Allen, a North Carolina-based law firm, offered some room for improvement but largely applauded the private prison giant for its ''genuine'' commitment to diversity principles, including by raising cultural awareness with a mural of Martin Luther King Jr. at one of its Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention centers in Arizona. The report also praised CoreCivic for its philanthropy and business practices that have ''benefitted communities of color.''
In an accompanying report on the company's diversity, equity, and inclusion '-- known as DEI '-- CoreCivic touted its ranks of nonwhite prison guards, diversity on its board of directors, and diverse ranks of wardens, as well as its partnership with a Black-led, pro-business trade group.
Those supposed strides elicited eye rolls among its critics. ''They put children's murals on the wall while incarcerating infants. That doesn't mean they have positive impacts for children,'' said Bob Libal, a longtime watchdog of the private prison industry, referencing the company's Taylor, Texas-based ICE detention center.
''This is hollow at best, and probably a deeply cynical attempt to whitewash a company that has a horrible reputation, a horrible track record of abuse and neglect of people who've been sentenced in their facilities,'' added Libal. The company has faced multiple allegations of severe understaffing and safety issues, as well as unsanitary conditions in many facilities.
''The reality is, CoreCivic's entire existence is offensive to Black and brown communities. They're trying to create some version, right, some image that they aren't one thousand percent harmful,'' said Bianca Tylek, the founder of Worth Rises, an advocacy group that focuses on the privatization of the criminal justice system.
The Tallahatchie County Correctional Facility operated by CoreCivic in Tutwiler, Miss., on Aug. 16, 2018.
Photo: Rogelio V. Solis/AP
''The audit tells us nothing,'' said Tylek. ''The private prison business model is the problem. Everything they do is the problem, and to be honest, sometimes we're at odds with other advocates because these racial equity audits are absolutely ridiculous and not an effective advocacy tool.''
Asked for comment about activist concerns, CoreCivic reiterated its support for the ''principles of diversity, equity and inclusion.'' The company, said spokesperson Ryan Gustin, ''didn't hesitate to participate in the recent racial equity audit.''
''They put children's murals on the wall while incarcerating infants. That doesn't mean they have positive impacts for children.''
But Tylek, Libal, and members of the activist community are not the intended audience for the report; the racial equity audit and similar measures are part of an opaque and virtually unregulated rubric that sets the flow of massive piles of investor dollars. CoreCivic's gestures are meant to shape its standing in ''environmental, social, and governance,'' or ESG, funds, a catchall term for a system that allows investors to put their money into companies that score as socially responsible by various metrics.
Compliance can be lucrative. For instance, among the many ESG ratings agencies, a company with nonwhite or female board members or a decision to simply conduct a racial equity audit or DEI report can automatically lead to a higher score, and corporations with high ESG rankings find placement in special exchange-traded funds, or ETFs, that are marketed as socially responsible, opening the door for investor cash.
Over $35 trillion in global assets are invested in funds that claim to vet companies using ESG principles, making the label one of the hottest trends in finance. Following the racial justice protests of 2020, a coalition of institutional funds, which now includes the California State Teachers' Retirement System, a pension fund with over $250 billion in assets, launched proxy campaigns to pressure publicly traded companies to undergo racial equity audits and to prioritize racial diversity issues.
Proponents of the approach claim that the market sprouting up around ESG principles provides a window, guiding investors into safer, less controversial companies while creating a market incentive for good corporate behavior, whether on racial justice, the climate crisis, or any number of issues.
Larry Fink, the chief executive of BlackRock Inc. and one of the most powerful ESG-focused asset managers in the world, has described the move toward socially responsible investing as a ''tectonic shift'' that stands to reshape capitalism as we know it. In his letter to investors this year, Fink made clear that racially diverse boards and racial diversity would be a focus of his company.
BlackRock is among the many corporations that sponsor television advertisements '-- the latest featuring NBA star Jalen Duren '-- touting their socially responsible or sustainable investment funds, luring ordinary retail investors.
But a growing chorus of critics have questioned the lofty promises of ESG investing. The high-minded rhetoric of the movement, they argue, serves to enrich a small set of ESG-focused consultants and fund managers while misleading the public and investor community and providing little to no benefit to society. They charge that the investing trend is no more than reputation laundering and, potentially, fraud on an industrial scale.
''People who are buying these funds almost always believe that they're doing something to make the world a better place, and in reality, they're just moving shares around in publicly traded companies,'' said Tariq Fancy, the former chief investment officer for social responsibility investing at BlackRock, who has emerged in recent years as a critic of ESG.
''People who are buying these funds almost always believe that they're doing something to make the world a better place, and in reality, they're just moving shares around in publicly traded companies.''
''It's actually dangerous because they imply real-world impact, creating a societal placebo,'' continued Fancy. ''It actually lowers the case for government regulation. If you think you can do something quick and easy like ESG, then it follows to say, 'We don't need a carbon tax.'''
Fancy also finds the righteous rhetoric of his former employer hypocritical. BlackRock will make a fortune in fees promoting an ESG model entirely based on voluntary self-reporting requirements and opaque scores, said Fancy, while using its power as a shareholder to block proposals that call on companies to disclose political spending '-- the very political spending that corporations use to prevent any meaningful laws and government regulations on social welfare spending or pollution.
''It's like they're giving us talking points on good sportsmanship, meanwhile, they're saying it's all right for teams to secretly pay off the referees.''
In an email, BlackRock spokesperson Matt Kobussen noted that the company provides multiple ESG index products, some of which include CoreCivic and others of which do not. The ETF that includes private prisons is based on ESG criteria provided by the index provider S&P, while another, the MSCI Small Cap ESG Aware, uses an index provided by MSCI and ''does not have exposure to CoreCivic or GEO Group,'' another main prison company.
Despite the rhetoric, the portfolio managers preaching the gospel of ESG are in fact legally prohibited from doing anything that compromises corporate profits. The types of changes they promote are superficial at best, critics charge.
What's more, regulators have taken notice that fund managers have marketed ESG investing with little due diligence in regard to how companies are changing any actual business practices or whether companies included in the funds meet the stated criteria. In May, around 50 German police officers raided the Frankfurt offices of DWS Group, the asset manager subsidiary of Deutsche Bank. The investigation stems from allegations by a former DWS Group executive that the company had made misleading statements about how ESG assets were allocated.
And this year, the Bank of New York Mellon Corp.'s asset manager paid $1.5 million to settle claims by the Securities and Exchange Commission over ''misstatements and omissions about ESG considerations.'' The bank, as part of the settlement, did not admit any guilt.
Earlier this month, word leaked that the SEC is currently investigating Goldman Sachs Group Inc. over similar claims about its ESG mutual fund business. In June 2020, Goldman Sachs renamed its blue-chip fund as the U.S. Equity ESG Fund, while maintaining the same top holdings.
Last month, the SEC began collecting comments for new regulations aimed at boosting transparency and accountability around ESG funds.
Measures of GoodnessAt the core of the criticisms is the fact that there is no set definition for how ESG rankings are devised. Competing ratings agencies and financial analysts offer a tangled web of various scores, with no consistency from firm to firm.
Charles Schwab Corp.'s asset management arm, for example, last year launched Schwab Ariel ESG ETF, an ESG fund that excludes tobacco products, the extraction of fossil fuels, weapons manufacturers, and operators of private prisons such as CoreCivic.
Other asset managers, however, sell ESG funds that do include private prisons. BlackRock's iShares ESG Screened S&P Small-Cap ETF, one of its social responsibility funds, includes CoreCivic. Investors purchasing shares in DWS Group's Xtrackers S&P SmallCap 600 ESG are also buying a slice of CoreCivic.
State Street Corp., an asset manager that is one of the loudest and most prominent proponents of ESG, markets a social responsibility fund, SPDR S&P SmallCap 600 ESG ETF, that owns shares in CoreCivic as well as the second-largest private prison company in the U.S., GEO Group Inc.
State Street spokesperson Deborah Heindel said in an email that ESG can be very broad or specific depending on who's defining the term. ''Case in point, a Google search pulls several million results from countless sources,'' she said.
Many ESG funds used to exclude certain arms manufacturers, arguing that the global sale of bombs and missiles did not constitute a social good '-- now there's a push to reward them.
Ratings agencies can change ESG formulas on a dime, with little public notice. Fund managers are free to choose any ratings agency with any formula, often with most sources of information completely self-reported by corporations.
CoreCivic, in its own ESG report, touts a 2021 award issued by Newsweek/Statista claiming that it is one of America's most responsible companies. The Newsweek/Statista ESG rankings give CoreCivic a high social rating in part based on the prison company's commitment to ''good causes'' and the number of women and racial minorities on its board of directors.
The criteria for what constitutes a socially responsible investment can change from day to day. In March, analysts from Citigroup Inc. suggested that companies that manufacture weapons used for the war in Ukraine to thwart the Russian invasion could count toward a better ESG score. ''Defending the values of liberal democracies and creating a deterrent, which preserves peace and global stability,'' they wrote.
Before this year, many ESG funds promoted the exclusion of certain arms manufacturers, arguing that the global sale of bombs and missiles did not constitute a social good '-- now there's a push to reward arms makers. If a shift in public opinion can reshape the entire model, that leaves many to wonder how any fund can claim fixed principles when ideas around social responsibility are inherently subjective.
''It's a scam, that's all it is, a scam,'' said Aswath Damodaran, a professor of finance at New York University's Stern School of Business, of ESG. ''How can you have a measure of goodness? Or let me put it another way: Name me one social factor where we have consensus in society. How the heck are we going to come up with one score?''
The CoreCivic board of directors, its ESG report proudly notes, is 36 percent ''gender or racially diverse,'' a figure that the company notes won recognition from a women's advocacy group. The private prison company's board includes Donna Alvarado, a former Reagan administration official, and Thurgood Marshall Jr., the son of the former Supreme Court justice.
''For-profit incarceration is the antithesis of social responsibility,'' said Libal. ''They've made profits on the back of incarceration at record numbers while contributing millions of dollars in campaign contributions to ensure their interests are met.''
''If your board is diverse, it doesn't matter what you're selling, right?'' he added. ''If you have enough women on the board of Blackwater, that doesn't make mercenary companies a positive influence on the world.''
Traders work beneath monitors displaying Eli Lilly and Co. signage on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange on May 23, 2016, in New York.
Photo: Michael Nagle/Bloomberg via Getty Images
''Greenwashing Is a Feature, Not a Bug''Fulfilling diversity goals is a highly visible way to offset lower scores in other areas. Defense contractors, fossil fuel companies, banks, and pharmaceutical giants that annually hike the prices of lifesaving drugs have all used diversity metrics to earn placement as socially responsible companies, eligible for placement in lucrative ESG funds. And according to a review by The Intercept, several of the corporations commonly included in ESGs have recently been under investigation or scrutiny, engaging in business practices that few would call socially responsible.
Eli Lilly and Co., the pharmaceutical company, is facing multiple regulatory and legal battles over its practice of hiking the price of insulin. The company raised the price of its Humalog line of insulin products by 1,219 percent since it launched. The high prevalence of diabetes among nonwhite Americans has placed the rising costs of insulin disproportionately on members of racial minority groups, a dynamic that some public health researchers argue amounts to a form of structural racism.
But the disparate impact of drug pricing dynamics are not measured by ESG scores. Instead, the Eli Lilly report notes that the company promotes diversity through a variety of measures, such as DEI training and employee resource groups that sponsor events such as the Lunar New Year Gala.
Those efforts are among the qualifications used to include Eli Lilly prominently in multiple ESG exchange-traded funds. Eli Lilly is the second-largest holding of a BlackRock fund marketed as focused on promoting companies that excel in the fields of diversity and inclusion.
Just Capital, a not-for-profit group that provides ESG rankings, scores Amazon as an industry leader and a three-time winner of its America's Most Just Companies award. Despite an aggressive anti-union campaign against its warehouse workers in Alabama and New York that has garnered international condemnation and wide-ranging complaints about working conditions, the Seattle-based company has a mixed record in the category of labor practices. But the score is boosted by Amazon's ''diversity, equity, and inclusion'' policies and the total number of jobs the company has created '-- two areas in which Just Capital ranks Amazon as the best company in America.
''I think it's smoke and mirrors. From a social, from a labor perspective, it's not a good company. That's like rating the Triangle Shirtwaist Co. a model employer in New York,'' said Seth Goldstein, an attorney for the Amazon Labor Union, which represents warehouse workers who won an upset victory to form the company's first labor union.
Just Capital '-- whose board includes HuffPost founder Arianna Huffington and Marc Morial, the president of the National Urban League '-- partners with Goldman Sachs to promote a special ESG fund that utilizes the organization's social responsibility analytics. The third-largest holding for the fund is Amazon.
In response to an inquiry from The Intercept, Just Capital said that Amazon was scored on a number of factors. ''We find that, like many other companies, Amazon is both a leader and a laggard relative to its peers across all of the individual stakeholder categories that we measure, from communities to environment to workers,'' wrote Martin Whittaker, chief executive of Just Capital, in a statement to The Intercept.
PepsiCo Inc. and Coca-Cola Co., for instance, routinely score well on ESG rankings through relatively low greenhouse gas emissions, while delivering a core product that is fueling a crisis of diabetes, obesity, and heart disease, noted Hans Taparia, an associate professor also at NYU's Stern School of Business, in an article for the Stanford Social Innovation Review. Alphabet, Amazon, and Facebook are also among the largest holdings of ESG funds but engage in a variety of monopoly, surveillance advertising practices and provide a core product that has fueled mental health issues among users. They all tout DEI and diversity-related measures in the glossy ESG reports that are submitted to fund managers.
''If a company's core business model does so much harm,'' wrote Taparia, ''the cover-up through 'good behavior' on other parameters shouldn't be so easy.''
Exxon Mobil Corp., one of the largest oil and gas companies in the world, has been cited as a prime example of an ESG victory, after the company added board members viewed as more favorable to action on climate change last year in response to pressure from activist investors and ESG-minded asset managers.
But there is still little evidence that ExxonMobil has changed any core fossil fuel-related business practices. The oil giant has massively increased spending on green-related marketing, and the word ''climate'' now appears all over its corporate reports. The company has sold off some assets that will be developed by other companies.
Calls for decarbonization, once central in the ESG movement, can also be offset by racial metrics.
Damodaran and his NYU colleagues have chronicled many of the inconsistencies and the subjective nature of ESG rankings. As oil majors sell off carbon-intensive oil and gas assets in order to comply with ESG fund objectives, Damodaran noted, the same assets are being purchased by private equity firms that are far less accountable, a shift in hands that he argues nullifies any greenhouse gas benefit from the campaign.
''So basically, here's what you accomplished,'' said Damodaran. ''You took the reserves out of a company where you had a semblance of prudent strategy in process and put it in the hands of the least scrupulous people on the face of the Earth. And if you declared this to be a victory, I'd hate to see what your defeat looks like.''
The calls for decarbonization, once central in the ESG movement, can also be offset by racial metrics. ESG rankings maintained by the S&P 500 now include ExxonMobil but exclude electric car marker Tesla Inc. One of the reasons? Racial discrimination charges lodged against Tesla, a dynamic bitterly highlighted by Tesla chief executive Elon Musk on Twitter. Many of the charges, including a class-action lawsuit, are still making their way through court.
Researchers have also found that companies selectively omit certain suppliers and business practices in order to artificially report low carbon emissions and thereby gain higher ESG scores.
One of the most revealing reports came from Bloomberg News, which found that one of the largest ESG ranking companies, MSCI Inc., which BlackRock uses to market ''sustainable'' stocks and bonds, provided year-to-year upgraded rankings to companies that increased levels of carbon emissions.
In the case of McDonald's Corp., MSCI provided an upgraded ESG ranking despite the fact that the company produced an increase of 7 percent in global emissions over four years. The ratings agency made the determination because the climate crisis did not pose a special risk or ''opportunity'' for the company.
The MSCI rankings for climate change score corporations over the possibility of climate regulations and whether restrictions on carbon emissions could harm future profits. In other words, when anti-regulation Republicans take office, the environmental scores of fossil fuel companies improve.
When MSCI gave positive ''water stress'' scores, the rating had no bearing on pollution or discharges into local water systems. Rather, the scores were awarded based on whether chemical companies had enough water to sustain their factories '-- an inversion of the very idea of environmentalism that reporters labeled as blatant doublespeak.
''This is exactly what gamification looks like: You create the rules of the game, I'll find a way to play it,'' said Damodaran. ''A lot of ESG advocates say ESG would work except for the greenwashing. And my response is, greenwashing is a feature, not a bug. It's exactly what you get when you create something like ESG.''
People walk past the New York Stock Exchange and the Fearless Girl Statue on March 23, 2021, in New York.
Photo: Angela Weiss/AFP via Getty Images
High-Minded Rhetoric, Even Higher FeesThree weeks after the George Floyd protests began in 2020, Marvin Owens, then the senior director for economic programs at the NAACP, appeared on CNBC to tout an ESG-style fund on diversity branded with the NAACP.
''The problem that has existed for ESG is that the 'S' has been very difficult to define, and that's why an organization like the NAACP, with its 111-year history of being advocates for African Americans in this country, is the right kind of organization to partner on this work,'' said Owens.
The ETF, Owens told CNBC, is ''the next evolution in our corporate advocacy work around closing the wealth gap for African Americans in this country.'' The Minority Empowerment ETF website features the logo of the NAACP and iconic images from civil rights history.
Owens noted that the fund used a variety of diversity metrics, reflecting the NAACP's scorecards on corporations, to invest in companies that make ''commitments, public commitments, to standing against racial discrimination.''
Two years later, the NAACP ETF's largest holdings include Amazon, Tesla, Meta Platforms Inc., Johnson & Johnson, Microsoft Corp., JPMorgan Chase & Co., and Nvidia Corp. The holdings are fairly similar to many large- and mid-cap ETFs, such as the Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund, or VTI, which has the same seven companies among its largest holdings.
The difference, however, is the fee structure. The Minority Empowerment ETF has a fee of 0.49 percent compared with the VTI fee of 0.03 percent, making the NAACP ETF 16 times more expensive for investors. Impact Shares, the plan sponsor that operates the Minority Empowerment ETF, in addition to other thematic ETFs around sustainability and women's empowerment, says that the excess profits after expense fees are donated back to the NAACP, though it has not made enough fees to transfer any funds to the NAACP yet.
Impact Shares has lobbied the federal government to allow retirement plans to be invested with ESG funds. The investment firm wrote to regulators ''on behalf of Impact Shares and our advocacy partners including the NAACP.''
Asked how the ETF fund has impacted racial justice issues, Ethan Powell, the chief executive of Impact Shares, gave Amazon credit for permitting its workers to vote on a union. Amazon, he claimed, engaged in a ''significant shift in company policy'' by allowing workers at its Alabama warehouse ''the opportunity to vote on unionization'' this year.
Labor officials, however, contend that Amazon spent millions of dollars on efforts to derail the union vote and engaged in a campaign of intimidation and surveillance against workers suspected of sympathizing with the union '-- and that the unionization at Amazon was in spite of the company's efforts, not because of them.
LGBTQ Loyalty Holdings Inc., a company led in part by former Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank, launched the LGBTQ + ESG100 ETF, which invested in large-cap public companies that ''demonstrated a commitment to LGBTQ diversity and inclusion.'' The fund, which wound down earlier this year, had an even higher fee structure of 0.75 percent.
Despite the fact that the ESGs largely mirror traditional ETFs, a higher fee structure, typically benefiting investment managers, is common across the board. An analysis from the Wall Street Journal found that ESG funds have 43 percent higher fees than widely popular standard index funds.
Fancy, the BlackRock social responsibility CIO turned critic, has argued repeatedly that many ESG funds are virtually identical to existing mutual funds, rebranded as ''green'' with higher fees. There are almost no discernible differences other than marketing, he has said in a series of confessional essays about the nature of ESG.
The notion of investment funds that promote social change without any of the guilt of profiting from capitalism can be alluring. Betterment, a millennial-focused ''robo-advisor'' that markets wealth-building strategies, has sponsored Facebook ads promising racial justice-minded investing. Betterment steers consumers to products such as the NAACP ETF without warning of the high fees or an explanation that many of the holdings are simply traditional large companies that investors would find in ordinary funds.
Asset managers have even worked with public relations firms to co-opt public opinion around social justice movements into inflows of cash to ESG funds. In 2017, at the height of the #MeToo movement, State Street worked with advertising agency McCann New York to create the ''Fearless Girl'' campaign, which featured a statue of a young woman, with her arms planted defiantly on her hips, that was placed in front of the bronze Charging Bull outside the New York Stock Exchange.
The corporate beneficiaries of the fund might come as a surprise to retail investors who thought they were supporting the political goals of #MeToo.
The wildly successful ad campaign, launched the day after International Women's Day, was designed to advertise State Street's women-focused SHE ETF, an ESG fund marketed as a vehicle to promote companies with gender diversity on corporate boards. But the corporate beneficiaries of the fund might come as a surprise to retail investors who thought they were supporting the political goals of #MeToo or feminism more broadly. The current SHE ETF holdings include weapons maker Northrop Grumman Corp., fracking giant Pioneer Natural Resources Co., and health insurer UnitedHealth Group Inc.
State Street and other fund managers have boasted about the growth of ESG funds as a cash cow. Last December, Gary Shedlin, the chief financial officer at BlackRock, appeared at a conference hosted by Goldman Sachs at the Conrad Hotel in New York to tout the growth of the firm's ESG business. BlackRock ESG-related products, he said, had generated over 20 percent new fee growth. In January, BlackRock's ESG funds reportedly surged to over $508 billion in managed assets, more than double the previous year.
It's not just fund managers that are poised to gain from the influx of money into ESG. The trend has been a job creator for accountants, analysts, and other specialty consultants. MSCI, the largest data provider for ESG funds, disclosed that revenue from its ESG ratings business jumped to $166 million in 2021 from $90 million in 2019.
Both former attorneys general of the Obama administration are now serving as consultants to companies hoping to burnish their credentials as racially progressive. Eric Holder, now with the law firm Covington & Burling, was tapped by Citigroup to conduct its racial equity audit, to review its efforts to close the racial wealth gap. In April, Amazon announced that Loretta Lynch, a partner with Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, will work for the company to produce a similar report.
And Preet Bharara, the former U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, an Obama administration prosecutor turned vocal Trump critic, this month announced his move to become a partner at the law firm WilmerHale. According to reports, he will focus on advising companies on ESG. ''Simple-minded criticism of this issue fails to appreciate its complexity and its emerging importance,'' Bharara told the New York Times.
E SG investing has been an attractive proposition for investors who consider themselves to be civic-minded and want to use market logic to make change. But as The Intercept's review shows, diversity audits and other superficial measures are simply being used to sell investors on the same old funds.
The implication is explicit. Moore & Van Allen, the firm that conducted the racial equity audit on behalf of CoreCivic, noted in an article this year that such audits serve multiple goals, including increased profits and a competitive advantage in a market. The public relations benefits are also clear, the law firm argued. The racial equity audits can lead to a ''positive impact on reputation for companies,'' partners at the firm wrote.
Placing selective pressure on a few companies won't work, Damodaran argued, because businesses that voluntarily retreat from one area will be swiftly replaced by less accountable players, such as private equity or hedge funds. If advocates seek better business practices, he said, they should change the law to force compliance instead.
''These are decisions we should be making as voters, as regulators pushing for change. Instead, we've passed on this responsibility to CEOs and fund managers.''
''These are decisions we should be making as voters, as regulators pushing for change,'' said Damodaran. ''Instead, we've passed on this responsibility to CEOs and fund managers to make these decisions for us.''
''The U.S. political sphere is putting optics over substance,'' noted Fancy, the former BlackRock executive. ''We could do some version of reparations, like a serious investment in Black communities and education and social welfare, but that's going to cost a lot of money.'' Instead, he said, high-profile Black Americans are elevated onto corporate boards to ''create a marketing narrative'' that helps a small number of elites without substantive change for the public.
One chief executive of a publicly traded company, who asked for anonymity while speaking with The Intercept, said he recently paid around $20,000 to social responsibility consultants in order to produce a special report to submit to ratings agencies. The ESG professionals created a document that dazzled with progress on a number of environmental and racial grounds. The self-reported data isn't checked by anyone, he noted with a shrug.
The chief executive said that he appears white to most people, but he is technically a quarter nonwhite, making him, for the purposes of ESG, a ''diverse'' CEO '-- a dynamic he found absurd.
''It's kind of like the one-drop rule. I'm diverse for the purpose of these rules, they really make no sense,'' said the executive, who wondered how asset managers and investors can demand compliance on rules around racial identity when race is socially constructed, not a biological reality.
''We didn't change any business practices. It's a charade, yet no one questions this stuff,'' he added. ''It sounds good, but it doesn't do anything.''
European fund managers set to go all in on ESG - survey By Reuters
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 14:14
(C) Reuters. FILE PHOTO: A power-generating windmill turbine and the church of the village are pictured during sunset at a wind park in Ecoust-Saint-Mein, France, September 6, 2020. REUTERS/Pascal Rossignol/File Photo By Juliette Portala
(Reuters) - Over two-thirds of European asset managers and distributors are considering halting the launch or distribution of products that do not comply with environmental, social and governance (ESG) standards, a survey by PwC Luxembourg showed on Monday.
Flows into ESG funds have surged in recent years, driven in part by a growing regulatory focus on issues such as climate change as governments seek to push more money to activities that can help them meet their net-zero emissions goals.
The PwC survey of 3,354 respondents suggested ESG assets domiciled in Europe could grow to between 7.4 trillion euros and 9.0 trillion euros ($7.8 to $9.5 trillion) by 2025 and account for up to 56% of total European mutual fund assets, against 37% at the end of last year.
Against that backdrop, almost 72% of European asset managers were willing to halt all non-ESG product launches, with more than 60% planning to do so by the end of 2024, PwC wrote in its report, adding it foresaw long-term challenges for asset managers that maintain a hybrid ESG/non-ESG product range as the shift materialises.
Among independent financial advisers, private and retail banks, as much as 68% plan to cease their distribution of non-ESG products altogether, of which over half intend to do so within the coming two years, the survey showed.
"As regional regulations become increasingly stringent and as efforts towards the development of global ESG standards intensify, managers '' especially those willing to compete at a global level '' will be pushed towards an all-encompassing alignment of their products and operations with ESG," financial services market leader at PwC Olivier Carre said.
($1 = 0.9480 euros)
The Astonishing Implications of Schedule F 'ܠ Brownstone Institute
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 14:05
Two weeks before the 2020 general election, on October 21, 2020, Donald Trump issued an executive order (E.O. 13957) on ''Creating Schedule F in the Excepted Service.''
It sounds boring. Actually, it would have fundamentally changed, in the best possible way, the entire functioning of the administrative bureaucracy that rules this country in a way that bypasses both the legislative and judicial process, and has ruined the checks and balances inherent in the US Constitution.
The administrative state for the better part of a century, and really dating back to the Pendleton Act of 1883, has designed policy, made policy, structured policy, implemented policy, and interpreted policy while operating outside the control of Congress, the president, and the judiciary.
The gradual rise of this 4th branch of government '' which is very much the most powerful branch '' has reduced the American political process to mere theater as compared with the real activity of government, which rests with the permanent bureaucracy.
Any new president can hire the heads of agencies and they can hire staff, which are known as political appointees. These 4,000 political appointees ostensibly rule 432 agencies (as listed by the Federal Register) as well as some 2.9 million employees (aside from the military and postal service) that effectively inhabit permanent jobs. This permanent state '' sometimes called the deep state '' knows the ropes and the processes of government far better than any temporary political appointee, thus reducing the appointed jobs to cosmetic positions for the press to hound while the real actions of government take place behind the scenes.
From 2020 and onward, the American people got to know this administrative state well. They ordered us to wear masks. They deployed their influence to close small businesses and churches. They limited how many people we could have in our homes. They festooned our businesses with plexiglass and told everyone to stay six-feet apart. They demanded two weeks of quarantine when crossing state borders. They decided which medical procedures were elective and non-elective. And they finally demanded compliance with vaccine mandates at the penalty of job loss.
None of this was ordered by legislation. It was all invented on the spot by the permanent staff of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. We had no idea they had such power. But they do. And that same power which allowed those egregious attacks on rights and liberties also belongs to the Food and Drug Administration, the Department of Labor, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Homeland Security, and all the rest.
Donald Trump came into office with the promise of draining the swamp, without understanding entirely what that meant. He gradually came to realize that he had no control over most of the affairs of government, not because he had no patience for the legislative process but because he had no ability to terminate the employment of most of the civilian bureaucracy. Nor could his political appointees control it. The media, he gradually came to realize, echoed the priorities and concerns of this administrative state due to long-established relationships that led to nonstop leaks that spread false information.
In May of 2018, he took his first steps to gain some modicum of control over this deep state. He issued three executive orders (E.O. 13837, E.O. 13836, and E.O.13839) that would have diminished their access to labor-union protection when being pressed on the terms of their employment. Those three orders were litigated by the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) and sixteen other federal labor unions.
All three were struck down with a decision by a DC District Court. The presiding judge was Ketanji Brown Jackson, who was later rewarded for her decision with a nomination to the Supreme Court, which was affirmed by the US Senate. The prevailing and openly stated reason for her nomination was said to be mostly demographic: she would be the first black woman on the Court. The deeper reason was more likely traceable to her role in thwarting actions by Trump which had begun the process of upending the administrative state. Jackson's judgment was later reversed but Trump's actions were embroiled in a juridical tangle that rendered them moot.
Following the lockdowns of mid-March 2020, Trump became increasingly frustrated with the CDC and Anthony Fauci in particular. Trump was profoundly aware that he had no power to fire the man, despite his epicly terrible role in prolonging Covid lockdowns long after Trump wanted to open up to save the American economy and society.
Trump's next step was radical and brilliant: the creation of a new category of federal employment. It was called Schedule F.
Employees of the federal government classified as Schedule F would have been subject to control by the elected president and other representatives. Who are they? They are those who met the following criteria:
Positions of a confidential, policy-determining, policy-making, or policy-advocating character not normally subject to change as a result of a Presidential transition shall be listed in Schedule F. In appointing an individual to a position in Schedule F, each agency shall follow the principle of veteran preference as far as administratively feasible.
Schedule F employees would be fired. ''You're fired'' was the slogan that made Trump TV famous. With this order, he would be in a position to do the same to the federal bureaucracy. The order further demanded a thorough review throughout the government.
Each head of an executive agency (as defined in section 105 of title 5, United States Code, but excluding the Government Accountability Office) shall conduct, within 90 days of the date of this order, a preliminary review of agency positions covered by subchapter II of chapter 75 of title 5, United States Code, and shall conduct a complete review of such positions within 210 days of the date of this order.
The Washington Post in an editorial expressed absolute shock and alarm at the implications:
The directive from the White House, issued late Wednesday, sounds technical: creating a new ''Schedule F'' within the ''excepted service'' of the federal government for employees in policymaking roles, and directing agencies to determine who qualifies. Its implications, however, are profound and alarming. It gives those in power the authority to fire more or less at will as many as tens of thousands of workers currently in the competitive civil service, from managers to lawyers to economists to, yes, scientists. This week's order is a major salvo in the president's onslaught against the cadre of dedicated civil servants whom he calls the ''deep state'' '-- and who are really the greatest strength of the U.S. government.
Ninety days after October 21, 2020 would have been January 19, 2021, the day before the new president was to be inaugurated. The Washington Post commented ominously: ''Mr. Trump will try to realize his sad vision in his second term, unless voters are wise enough to stop him.''
Biden was declared the winner due mostly to mail-in ballots.
On January 21, 2021, the day after inauguration, Biden reversed the order. It was one of his first actions as president. No wonder, because, as The Hill reported, this executive order would have been ''the biggest change to federal workforce protections in a century, converting many federal workers to 'at will' employment.''
How many federal workers in agencies would have been newly classified at Schedule F? We do not know because only one completed the review before their jobs were saved by the election result. The one that did was the Congressional Budget Office. Its conclusion: fully 88% of employees would have been newly classified as Schedule F, thus allowing the president to terminate their employment.
This would have been a revolutionary change, a complete remake of Washington, DC, and all politics as usual.
Trump's EO 13957 was a dagger aimed directly at the heart of the beast. It might have worked.
It would have gotten us closer to the restoration of a Constitutional system of government in which we have 3 '' not 4 '' branches of government that are wholly controlled by the people's representatives. It would have gone a long way toward gutting the administrative state of its power and returning the affairs of state to the people's control.
The action was stopped dead due to the election results.
Whatever one's view of Trump, one has to admire the brilliance of this executive order. It shows that Trump had come to understand the problem and actually innovate a fundamental solution, or at least the beginnings of one. The ''deep state'' as we've come to know it would have been curbed, and we would have taken a step toward recreating the system that existed before the Pendleton Act of 1883.
Many efforts have been deployed through the years to regain constitutional control over the permanent bureaucracy. An example is the Hatch Act of 1939 which forbids employees of the government to work for political campaigns. That act turned out to be toothless '' one does not need to work for a campaign in order to skew one's labor in the direction of always granting the federal government more power and control '' and largely made irrelevant in the succeeding decades.
Trump came to office promising to drain the swamp but it was very late in his term before he figured out the means at his disposal to do just that. His final effort took place merely two weeks before the election that was decided in favor of his opponent Biden, who quickly reversed this action just two days following the deadline of an ordered review that would have reclassified, and thus gained control over, a sizable portion of the administrative state.
With Executive Order 12003 (''Protecting the Federal Workforce''), Biden saved the deep state's bacon, leaving the efforts finally to drain the swamp to another day and another president.
Still, Executive Order 13957 exists in the archives as a possible path forward to restore checks and balances in the US system of government. A new Congress can also take such steps at least symbolically.
Until something takes place to restore the people's control of the administrative state, a sword of Damocles will continue to hang over the entire country and we will never be safe from another round of lockdowns and mandates.
Should a genuinely reformist president ever take office, this executive order must be issued on the very first day. Trump waited too long but that mistake need not be repeated.
2020-23780Jeffrey A. Tucker is Founder and President of the Brownstone Institute and the author of many thousands of articles in the scholarly and popular press and ten books in 5 languages, most recently Liberty or Lockdown. He is also the editor of The Best of Mises. He writes a daily column on economics at The Epoch Times, and speaks widely on topics of economics, technology, social philosophy, and culture.
READ MORE
Subscribe to Brownstone for More News
Accident Piper PA-24-250 Comanche N14FC, 26 Jun 2022
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 13:29
This information is added by users of ASN. Neither ASN nor the Flight Safety Foundation are responsible for the completeness or correctness of this information.If you feel this information is incomplete or incorrect, you can
submit corrected information.
Narrative:The aircraft experienced engine issues while en-route to Newnan Coweta County Airport, (COO) and was attempting a diversionary landing to Roosevelt Memorial Airport, (5A9), Warm Springs, Georgia, and made an emergency landing in a field short of the Airport. One occupant received serious injuries and, the second occupant's injuries are unknown. Sources:
https://www.11alive.com/article/news/local/faa-ntsb-meriwether-memorial-warm-springs-plane-piper-pa-24/85-25f32cdc-b049-4d3e-a5ce-c633f02e75d2 https://registry.faa.gov/AircraftInquiry/Search/NNumberResult?nNumberTxt=14FC https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a0a0d7&lat=32.992&lon=-84.713&zoom=13.0&showTrace=2022-06-26 https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N14FC https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n14fc#2c67a625 Location
Revision history:
Date/timeContributorUpdates28-Jun-2022 07:14harroAdded 29-Jun-2022 00:06johnwgUpdated [Time, Location, Phase, Source, Damage, Narrative, Category]30-Jun-2022 02:51Captain AdamUpdated [Operator, Location, Source, Narrative]
33 Problems With Media in One Chart
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 13:18
Ranked: The Best-Selling Video Game Consoles of All TimeIn 1972, the first-ever commercially available home video game console hit the market'--the Magnavox Odyssey. Players of the Odyssey had a choice between two built-in games that were stored directly in the device, and would use a joystick and dials as a controller.
Video game consoles have come a long way since then, and the console market has grown into a multi-billion dollar industry that's expected to reach $72.67 billion in value by the end of 2022.
This graphic by Enrique Mendoza uses data from VGChartz to show the market leaders in the industry, by highlighting the top-selling video consoles of all time, as of May 8, 2022.
Nine Generations of Video Game ConsolesBefore diving into the top-selling consoles, it's worth taking a step back to touch on the evolution of home consoles to show how they've changed over the years.
We dug into the literature on the history of video game consoles, and found that most articles and blog posts on the topic cite nine different generations of devices.
Here's a breakdown of each generation, and some of their most noteworthy systems:
1972: Gen One, Where it BeganConsoles in the first generation had pre-built games that were stored directly on the device. They include the Magnavox Odyssey and Atari's Pong.
1976: Gen Two EmergesIn this generation, games were sold separately, rather than programmed into the device. Consoles of this gen include the Fairchild Channel F and the Atari 2600.
1983: Gen Three, the ''8-bit Generation''This era's consoles typically had 8-bit processes which allowed for more advanced graphics for the time. A few notable consoles during this gen were '‹'‹the Sega SG-1000 and the Nintendo Famicom, released outside Japan as the Nintendo Entertainment System (NES).
1987: Gen Four Elevates Handheld GamingHome consoles were released with 16-bit systems, meaning that audio and graphics improved even more in this era. But an arguably bigger moment for this gen was the emergence of the Nintendo Game Boy.
1993: The 3D Start of Gen Five This generation saw the move away from pixels and towards 3D polygons. Some consoles like the Sony PlayStation started using CD-ROMs instead of cartridges, which stored more data at a cheaper cost and changed the industry.
1998: Gen Six and the InternetAt the start of this generation, the three major players in the console space were Sony, Sega, and Nintendo. By the end, Sega would be replaced with Microsoft as it launched the Xbox and helped popularize online console gaming.
2005: HD Graphics and Motion Controls of Gen SevenOn one side of the market, Microsoft and Sony were competing with high-definition graphics, faster processers, and different forms (Blu-rays or DVDs). But Nintendo's motion-sensing Nintendo Wii arguably defined this generation, and the handheld Nintendo DS swept the market as well.
2012: Gen Eight's Modern ConsolesConsoles of this era started having increased connectivity and processing power, with full HD an expectation. It was also an extremely long generation, starting with Nintendo's unsuccessful Wii U and ending with the ultra-successful Nintendo Switch, widely considered the first hybrid console with three different ways to play: TV mode, handheld mode, or tabletop mode.
2020: Gen Nine and BeyondSo far, this generation has brought upgraded graphics (up to 8K resolution), larger games, and game-streaming capabilities. Devices in this gen include the Xbox Series X/S and PlayStation 5, which both use solid state drives to increase speed and performance, while Nintendo has yet to introduce a 9th generation device.
The Best-Selling Game ConsolesThe best-selling video game console of all time is Sony's PlayStation 2 (PS2). More than 157 million systems have been sold around the world since its launch in March 2000.
RankConsoleManufacturerGlobal lifetime sales (millions)1PlayStation 2 (PS2)Sony157.682Nintendo DS (DS)Nintendo154.903Game Boy (GB)Nintendo118.694PlayStation 4 (PS4)Sony116.975Nintendo Switch (NS)Nintendo107.216PlayStation (PS)Sony102.507Nintendo Wii (Wii)Nintendo101.648PlayStation 3 (PS3)Sony87.419Xbox 360 (X360)Microsoft85.810Game Boy Advance (GBA)Nintendo81.5111PlayStation Portable (PSP)Sony81.0912Nintendo 3DS (3DS)Nintendo75.9513Nintendo Entertainment System (NES)Nintendo61.9114Xbox One (XOne)Microsoft50.5715Super Nintendo Entertainment System (SNES)Nintendo49.1016Nintendo 64 (N64)Nintendo32.9317Sega Genesis (GEN)Sega29.5418Atari 2600 (2600)Atari27.6419Xbox (XB)Microsoft24.6520GameCube (GC)Nintendo21.7421PlayStation 5 (PS5)Sony19.3222PlayStation Vita (PSV)Sony16.2123Xbox Series X/S (XS)Microsoft14.3224Nintendo Wii U (WiiU)Nintendo13.9725GameGear (GG)Sega10.6226Sega Saturn (SAT)Sega8.8227Dreamcast (DC)Sega8.2028Atari 7800 (7800)Atari4.30Despite the fact the PS2's been discontinued since 2013, no other gaming console has managed to top it'--in fact, the next closest actively-sold consoles, the PS4 and Nintendo Switch, are each more than 40 million units behind.
One major factor for the PS2's success was its built-in DVD player. At the time, DVD players were very expensive, and in many places a PS2 was a cheaper and effective alternative. It was also one of the first devices to be ''backward compatible,'' meaning users could play most of their PS1 games on the PS2. This meant players didn't have to buy a whole new library of games when they made the switch to a PS2, and Sony could tap into its existing customer base.
But while Sony's PS2 is the top-selling console on the list, Nintendo has more top-selling consoles on the list'--almost half of the consoles on the list are manufactured by Nintendo (11), while only seven are made by Sony.
What Will it Take to Out-Sell the PS2?As the PS4 has started taking a backseat to the PS5 in sales and promotion, the current most-likely contender for the best-selling console crown is the Nintendo Switch. Early in 2022, it was the fastest console to sell 100 million units.
With lots of hype around the possibilities of AR and VR, it'll be interesting to see what new features come with the next generation of gaming consoles.
Will future devices ever beat the PS2's record-breaking sales? Time will tell. But for now, the 22-year-old console continues to hold its well-earned spot at the top.
Hundreds of hives destroyed in bee mite eradication effort
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 13:14
Live
About 600 beehives have been destroyed and eight properties infected as NSW attempts to stop the spread of the varroa mite, with authorities confident of containing the outbreak.
About 440 beekeepers are impacted while the eradication zone has been expanded to about 25 kilometres north of Newcastle where the mite, which is deadly to bees, was first detected.
NSW Agriculture Minister Dugald Saunders said he was optimistic the pest could still be eradicated.
''If the teams can get on top of things quite quickly, then the situation can be managed,'' he said on Wednesday.
''It is not just an all-in-at-once destruction of hives. It's very much working with the apiarist at the time to make sure they're comfortable,'' Mr Saunders said.
Cases were identified on Tuesday are at Newcastle and Seaham, prompting the expansion of the exclusion and eradication zones.
Tweet from @millbernasconiJohn Tracey, from the NSW Department of Primary Industries who is helping coordinate the emergency response, said the industry and community had provided excellent support.
''We're confident that we're going to achieve eradication, that's the goal,'' he said.
Beekeeper Ana Martin is still waiting to hear if her 40 hives at Bulahdelah will be destroyed, after the area was declared a biosecurity zone on Wednesday.
Ms Martin said she appreciated how hard the department was working to contain a developing situation, but still had many questions.
''No one has come to us and said we are about to euthanise your bees, so we don't know exactly,'' she said.
Ms Martin said it was not just the economic loss but the sadness of having to euthanise the bees.
''Between the drought, fires, floods and now varroa there seems to be a bit of bad luck for beekeepers lately,'' she said.
Amateur Beekeepers Australia's Sue Carney said some had been left frustrated because they wanted an immediate response ''but they also understand that DPI officers are working hard to resolve the situation''.
She said dozens of beekeepers had contacted her organisation.
''It's all so new, people are just trying to get their head around what they can and can't do.''
Mr Saunders said the department was trying to get to people as quickly as possible and encouraged beekeepers with questions to get in touch.
Members of the Hunter Valley Amateur Beekeepers group will meet again with DPI representatives on Wednesday night, after meeting on Tuesday night.
NSW bee industry prepares for devastation after parasite discoveryActing chief executive of the Australian Honey Bee Industry council Danny Le Feuvre said authorities were working to identify and destroy all of the hives within the 10-kilometre eradication zones.
Mr Le Feuvre said while Sunday's emergency order was valid for six months and stopped people in NSW from moving their bees, he did not expect it to be in place that long.
''Even when that is lifted, hopefully within a week or two weeks, there will still be some restrictions in the Newcastle area,'' he said.
The order affects about 270,000 hives across NSW.
''Whilst there's a standstill, no one can move bees in the whole state, there are really big and significant fines in place, even jail time,'' he said.
Urgent tests are also underway to determine whether the mites found in NSW have deformed wing virus.
The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation's expert on honeybee pathogens, John Roberts, said the mite and the virus often came together '' and when they did, they were a dangerous duo.
The mites feed on the blood of adult and larval bees and over time can weaken and kill colonies.
If the mites have the virus they can pass it to bees while enjoying their blood meals.
Infected bees end up with deformed wings, abdomens and other problems.
''If it's just the feeding damage, and not the virus damage as well, it's much lower impact than in combination, when they are acting together,'' Dr Roberts said.
''It will be important to keep monitoring [for the virus] at the same time as monitoring the mite, because it is as significant a threat as the mite.''
-with AAP
Biden Admin To Deploy 1.6 Million Doses Of Monkeypox Vaccines In "Enhanced" Strategy | ZeroHedge
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 13:13
Authored by Mimi Nguyen Ly via The Epoch Times,
The Biden administration announced it will expand access to monkeypox vaccines in a new ''enhanced'' national strategy to combat the outbreak, which includes the deployment of 296,000 vaccine doses over the coming weeks, and potentially 1.6 million vaccine doses over the coming months.
Xavier Becerra, secretary of Health and Human Services, speaks at the HHS headquarters in Washington, on June 28, 2022. (Nicholas Kamm/AFP via Getty Images)
The plan seeks to ''expand vaccination for individuals at risk and make testing more convenient for healthcare providers and patients across the country,'' the White House said in a statement on June 28.
Source: BNO
Under the strategy, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will immediately allocate 56,000 doses of the two-dose Jynneos vaccine, which are currently in the national stockpile, to states and territories across the United States.
''States will be offered an equitable allotment based on cases and proportion of the population at risk for severe disease from monkeypox, and the federal government will partner with state, local, and territorial governments in deploying the vaccines,'' the White House announced.
The move is a major step up from the 9,000 doses of the Jynneos vaccine that HHS has so far deployed from the national stockpile to the 32 states and jurisdictions that requested the vaccine.
HHS will also allocate another 240,000 doses in the coming weeks ''to a broader population of individuals at risk,'' as more doses are received from the manufacturer. This would bring the total number of vaccines to be distributed over the coming weeks to 296,000.
The White House said HHS will hold another 60,000 vaccines in reserve.
HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra said in a statement that the new strategy allows the government to ''maximize the supply of currently available vaccines and reach those who are most vulnerable to the current outbreak.''
...
Up until now, monkeypox vaccines have been provided only to people who have had confirmed exposure to a monkeypox case. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) from the CDC now recommends that vaccines will be made available to people with ''confirmed monkeypox exposures and presumed exposures.''
''This includes those who had close physical contact with someone diagnosed with monkeypox, those who know their sexual partner was diagnosed with monkeypox, and men who have sex with men who have recently had multiple sex partners in a venue where there was known to be monkeypox or in an area where monkeypox is spreading,'' HHS said in a statement.
...
The White House noted that the ACAM2000 vaccine ''cannot be provided to individuals who are immunocompromised or who have heart disease.''
Read more here...
Jan. 6 'Electronic Surveillance Unit' Was "Illegal", Says Rep. Gohmert; Attorney Suggests "Entrapment" | ZeroHedge
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 13:12
Authored by Patricia Tolson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
As previously reported in an exclusive June 20 report, evidence proves that ''plainclothes'' members of a special Electronic Surveillance Unit (ESU) were embedded among Jan. 6, 2021, protesters for the purposes of conducting video surveillance. According to experts, one believes the activity itself may have been against the law. The other contends it was done for the purpose of entrapment.
Even after Capitol occupation and violence on January 6, 2021, Capitol Hill Police made no attempt to apprehend "Q Anon Man," who is on the Senate steps just a few feet from the Capitol Hill Police line. This photo was taken after the Capitol Hill Police removed protesters from inside the Senate wing of the Capitol. (Courtesy of J. Michael Waller)Against the Law?Speaking as a former prosecutor and three-term District Judge, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) told The Epoch Times, ''if you're going to have electronic surveillance of people there has to be warrants.''
As Gohmert explained, ''FISA courts have granted warrants,'' with ''no particular clarity'' and ''no probable cause that a crime's been committed or that this person engaged in a crime.''
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) was established under the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). ''Pursuant to FISA,'' the FISC website explains, ''the Court entertains applications submitted by the United States Government for approval of electronic surveillance, physical search, and other investigative actions for foreign intelligence purposes.''
Regarding domestic electronic surveillance, the Department of Justice (DOJ) website, ''Because of the well-recognized intrusive nature of many types of electronic surveillance, especially wiretaps and 'bugs,' and the Fourth Amendment implications of the government's use of these devices in the course of its investigations, the relevant statutes (and related Department of Justice guidelines) provide restrictions on the use of most electronic surveillance, including the requirement that a high-level Department official specifically approve the use of many of these types of electronic surveillance prior to an Assistant United States Attorney obtaining a court order authorizing interception.''
Furthermore, ''when court authorization for video surveillance is deemed necessary, it should be obtained by way of an application and order predicated on Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(b) and the All Writs Act (28 U.S.C. § 1651). The application and order should be based on an affidavit that establishes probable cause to believe that evidence of a Federal crime will be obtained by the surveillance. In addition, the affidavit should comply with certain provisions of the Federal electronic surveillance statutes.''
Gohmert surmised: ''When you see confirmed judges are just willing to completely abrogate the U.S. Constitution because they're the star chamber of the secret court, and they figure nobody will ever find out what they're doing, then you know when you see there's an Electronic Surveillance Unit, well, something's not right.''
Gohmert's concerns with the ESU surveillance are two-fold:
Were the legally required warrants obtained?
If so, how could a judge approve a warrant for surveillance before a crime has been committed and with no probable cause?
''We can't have secret units doing secret surveillance of people that have committed no crime, no probable cause of a crime. Just getting blanket surveillance,'' Gohmert asserted. ''We don't know what kind of warrant they had or even if they had warrants. But to deploy Electronic Surveillance Units tells us there's a lot more here that we need to find out about and obviously it's not going to be uncovered at least for another six months.''
But Gohmert added that ''there is also more information we haven't gotten and information that continues to leak out drip by drip.''
''Like this in [article] The Epoch Times,'' Gohmert noted, ''pointing out how until the deployment of munitions, the crowd was peaceful. I had heard from people and seen people interviewed saying there wasn't any violence out there. 'We were just mulling around, chanting stuff from time to time, then they started firing on us with tear gas and provoked the crowd.' They created chaos, and you just wonder what was going on.''
The EvidenceEvidence of the embedded ESU members was discovered in a Jan. 3, 2021, First Amendment Demonstrations report, issued by Chief of Police Robert Contee of the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD), Homeland Security Bureau, Special Operations Division, obtained exclusively by The Epoch Times. While it is unclear who the MPD ESU ''members'' were, the report stated they wore a specific ''bracelet on their left wrist identifying them as MPD personnel'' among the protesters. Of the 37 ''Specialized Units'' listed as part of the MPD, an ESU is not among them.
Also in the report, revealed now for the first time, was the advisory that the Special Operations Division ''will have personnel to assist with this detail and will assist with any demonstration.'' Among them were Domestic Security Officers, or DSOs.
Photo of bracelet worn by plainclothes members of the Metropolitan Police Department's Electronic Surveillance Unit, embedded in the crowds on Jan. 6, 2021 to ''document the actions of the demonstrators and MPD's response to any civil disobedience or criminal activity.'' (Metropolitan Police Department First Amendment Demonstrations report.)The Special Operations Division is part of the United States Secret Service, which is part of Homeland Security.
Under the heading of ''Special Operations Division '-- Deployment Requirements,'' the report said ''the Incident Commander'' shall ensure that specific objectives were ''adhered to.'' Among those is the order that ''Long Range Acoustical Device (LRAD) '' The LRAD along with the warning sheets shall be deployed by the DSO members along with the munitions load out and arrest kits.''
Domestic Security Officers (pdf) are also part of Homeland Security's Special Operations Division.
Homeland Security Organizational Flowchart (ACTIVE MPD Org Charts)According to The Focus, the DSO ''can be heard shouted on audio recordings of the Capitol siege, when law enforcement officers needed additional support against the oncoming masses.''
''DSOs are primarily used as riot police, to dole out such crowd control measures as tear gas, pepper spray, batons and rubber bullets intended to disperse rioters. Their weapons can be lethal and are only to be used in the most extreme circumstances.''
Video evidence shows an unidentified individual handing weapons to people through a window from inside the Capitol building.
Joseph McBride, an attorney for multiple January 6 prisoners and defendants identified a man tagged by ''Sedition Hunters'' as ''Red-Faced 45.'' The man McBride says is ''clearly law enforcement,'' was dressed in red from head to toe'--with even his face painted red. He appears in a video engaging in continuous dialogue with others whom McBride also insists are agents embedded in the crowd.
''He passes out weapons, sledgehammers, poles, mace. Some of those things come in contact with some of the other protesters who have subsequently been charged with possessing dangerous weapons and are using dangerous weapons at the Capitol. That is clearly entrapment.
That is clearly the government creating conditions of dangerousness and entrapping members of the crowd to possess weapons and possibly use them for reasons that we cannot comprehend.''
According to a 140-page report issued by then-Capitol Police Inspector General Michael Bolton'--''Review of the Events Surrounding the Jan. 6, 2021, Takeover of the U.S. Capitol'''--Capitol Police's Civil Disturbance Unit was ordered by supervisors not to use the department's most powerful tools, like stun guns. Also, ''heavier, less-lethal weapons,'' including stun grenades, ''were not used that day because of orders from leadership.''
Read more here...
OPEC is Whiffing on Oil Production Targets - The Daily Upside
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 13:11
Tired of sky-high prices at the pump. Don't hold your breath waiting for a reprieve.
On Wednesday, members of OPEC+, which includes 13 core OPEC and 10 non-core nations and collectively accounts for half the world's oil production, admitted to wildly missing oil-production targets so far this year. Worse yet: the group says considerable roadblocks remain.
Settling for a ''Psychological Impact''Stepping back in time: in May 2020, OPEC+ joined forces to coordinate production decreases aimed at re-balancing the suddenly overstocked global oil market (remember negative oil?). Since then, the group has collectively pumped 562 million barrels less than stipulated in the agreement, according to data from OPEC's Joint Technical Committee '-- setting the stage for today's dearth.
In light of today's $5+ per gallon, OPEC+ agreed in principle to raise production to 42 million barrels per day in May. But a new, independent assessment has found that OPEC+ has fallen short by a whopping 3 million barrels per day, prompting wide concern as to how long the supply-demand imbalance will persist:
New targets, discussed in a virtual meeting Wednesday and set to be formally approved today, will rely heavily on so-called spare capacity in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Saudi Arabia, in particular, will have to produce 11 million barrels per day in August '-- a level it's only reached twice in its history.Speaking with President Biden at the G-7 meeting on Monday, France's Emmanuel Macron said the UAE's Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al Nahyan privately claimed his country was already at maximum capacity, while the Saudis can only increase ''a little bit.''Throwing more cold water on its ability to re-balance the market, one OPEC member told The Wall Street Journal that any planned increase is ''meaningless'' and ''only made for its psychological impacts on the market,'' in light of Russian sanctions currently crimping supply.
G-7 Solutions: World leaders at the G-7 meeting this week discussed a potential solution of imposing a price cap on Russian oil, which, in theory, would force other producers to lower their prices. Analysts at Swedish bank SEB claim that move would likely backfire, causing Russia to retreat from the market altogether, and cause prices to surge to $200 per barrel. Time to dust off your Schwinn 7-speed.
St. Paul's next basic income experiment: $12,000 cash plus money for college
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 13:04
(C) Provided by Twin Cities Pioneer Press St. Paul Mayor Melvin Carter speaks at the Rondo Center of Diverse Expression's Juneteenth block party at the Rondo Commemorative Plaza in St. Paul on Sunday, June 19, 2022. (Scott Takushi / Pioneer Press) St. Paul is expanding its guaranteed basic income experiment, giving monthly checks to more families while also making deposits into some of their children's college savings accounts.
With the city council's support, Mayor Melvin Carter launched the People's Prosperity Guaranteed Income Pilot in November 2020, spending $300,000 in federal coronavirus relief grants and $1.2 million from donors.
That provided $500 a month for 18 months to 150 low-income families with no strings attached.
Carter announced Wednesday that the next phase, which he's calling CollegeBound Boost, will send money to two groups:
333 families will get $1,000 added to each of their children's College Bound St. Paul savings accounts. 333 additional families will get the same $1,000 for college, plus two full years of monthly $500 checks. The city will compare the outcomes for those families against a third ''control'' group of 333 families enrolled in College Bound St. Paul without the boost or monthly checks.
The city created the college savings program 2½ years ago in hopes of growing the share of city residents who go on to college while also improving young families' financial and general well-being.
Since 2020, every child who either is born in St. Paul or moves to the city before age 6 has been eligible to receive $50, plus occasional bonuses, in a college savings account earning modest interest. However, a state law that restricts information sharing on the children of unmarried mothers has made it difficult for the city to enroll many of its newborns.
ELIGIBILITY LIMITSTo become eligible for monthly checks from the basic income program, a family must be enrolled in College Bound St. Paul and have an income of no more than three times the federal poverty limit. The 666 recipient families will be chosen at random from that group, and the initial 150 families that received checks will not be excluded.
Pending approval from the city council next month, the expanded program will start around the end of August and will be funded with $4 million in coronavirus relief grants plus $1 million from philanthropists, the city said.
The mayor said early evidence from a similar guaranteed-income project in Stockton, Calif., found that offering cash assistance without limiting how the money could be spent helped some recipients take time off from a part-time job to interview for a full-time job, or buy a suit for a job interview, or purchase medicine.
The mayor, addressing conference-goers Wednesday at the St. Paul RiverCentre, recalled that his family received public food support, or WIC, when his daughter was born, but the requirements limited purchases to milk, eggs, peanuts and other foods to which she was allergic.
''That's not the way families work,'' said Carter, during the Midwest Asset Building Conference, which was focused on racial wealth gaps. ''Particularly during the pandemic, one family might need food support and one family might need child care support. '... I would be so angry, so offended every time we walked through the grocery store.''
Mayor: ''I have a 16-year-old daughter. When she was born we were on WIC'' food support, but she was allergic to whole milk, peanuts, eggs'... The things WIC buys. Saying here's cash but you can only spend it on limited things, or in this case lethal things, and not soy milk'...? pic.twitter.com/UZh1zBYMpi
'-- Frederick Melo, Reporter (@FrederickMelo) June 29, 2022
The program will be evaluated by University of Michigan professor William Elliott, a prominent researcher of children's college savings accounts who has worked with the city since the 2020 launch of College Bound St. Paul.
''Guaranteed income helps parents make it through a month. But savings for the future '-- through savings deposits from the city '-- gives families tangible hope for their kids' future,'' Elliott said in a statement released by the city. ''Both sides of the equation are crucial, and families will benefit immensely.''
Carter expects the study of St. Paul's initiative will demonstrate that negative tropes about poor people are untrue.
''If we understand that people aren't poor because they lack character, they're poor because they lack money, then all the things that we correlate with poverty suddenly aren't acts of God anymore,'' he said Wednesday. ''They're this fungible thing that we can impact just by making sure that people can get to the end of the month.''
An evaluation of the impact the monthly checks had on the first 150 recipients is not yet complete.
Correction: This article has been updated to correct details of the new initiative, which were not fully explained in a city press release.
St. Paul now accepting police chief applications, with plans to appoint next chief in late summer or early fall St. Paul Mayor Melvin Carter to Waste Management, trash hauler consortium: Do better Judge rules in favor of St. Paul unions over COVID vaccination mandate Minnesota United, Toro roll out irrigated natural grass soccer field at Arlington Hills Community Center
Dr. Carrie Madej and boyfriend recovering in ICU after life-threatening small plane crash that resulted in severe injuries'... ''A miracle we are alive'' '' National Addiction News
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 13:01
We have held back on reporting this story until we heard from Dr. Madej, and we asked for prayers of support on social media for her and her boyfriend.
Yesterday we learned that Dr. Madej '-- an outspoken medical expert who has blown the whistle on vaccines and clot shots '-- was involved in the crash of a small aircraft. She suffered a broken leg and some fractures alone her spine, saying she was ''bruised all over'' and also apparently has a black eye. Her boyfriend suffered a cranial concussion and other injuries. Both were taken to the hospital for emergency surgery, and from what we know so far, both are currently recovering in the ICU.
''It's a miracle we are alive''Today we have learned more details from Dr. Madej:
''It is a miracle we are alive,'' she says. The plane in which she was a passenger was returning from Florida when the engine quit. This is extremely rare in small aircraft, by the way, as aircraft must adhere to very strict schedules of engine overhauls according to FAA regulations. (I am trained as a small aircraft pilot and used to fly Cessna aircraft, so I am very familiar with FAA regulations on plane maintenance. However, I no longer fly small aircraft due to the deep state using small aircraft ''accidents'' to assassinate their targets. It's too easy to fake a crash and eliminate people they don't like.)
''We were gliding fine,'' said Dr. Madej, likely referring to what's called a ''glide path'' which is a specific angle of declination that allows an aircraft to maintain forward air speed as it loses altitude, allowing the pilot to maintain control over the flight surfaces. In effect, you are trading altitude for forward speed, so that you can glide the plane into a suitable emergency landing area. All small aircraft pilots are trained in this procedure, and it was common, I remember, for my instructor to turn off the engine during flight, even during night flights. We practiced glide path emergency procedures quite frequently.
She continues, '''...and then rpm drops to zero in seconds and we drop like a rock.''
I don't yet know what this means, since at this point the engine would have no longer been operating. However, the propeller may have stopped rotating since it was no longer under engine power, and it is possible that the glide path angle (and speed) for this specific aircraft makes it feel like you're plummeting quickly. Each aircraft has a different glide path angle and speed designation. For a Cessa 172, which is what I trained in, the typical glide path speed is around 75 knots. For the Piper aircraft in which Dr. Madej was a passenger, this speed would be something different.
In the crash, Dr. Madej says her tibia and fibula were cleanly severed and her foot was ''facing 120 degrees in the wrong direction.'' She says it took paramedics 30 minutes to reach them, as they crash landed in trees. However, her pilot was able to direct the plane to crash land along a logger's trail, which minimized the damage and probably saved their lives. ''That was another miracle in itself!''
She says a search and rescue crew were trying to find them, and she screamed out for help, after which they were finally located.
She explained that the pilot (name withheld here) ''has 20 years experience as a pilot and suffered skull fractures, facial fractures, T 10 fracture and he had LOC.''
Dr. Madej says she may be released by the hospital tomorrow.
Fuel can be tampered withThere is tremendous speculation on the internet about whether their small aircraft was tampered with in order to try to assassinate Dr. Madej. There is no current evidence of this that we are aware of, and the plane was obviously severely damaged in the crash to it may make a forensic examination impossible. However, from previous similar events, we know that the easiest way for a kill team to set this up is to tamper with the fuel.
Aviation fuel can be tampered with so that it gels over time, for example, and cannot be pumped through the engine's fuel filter. This slow gelling effect is accelerated at altitude where temperatures are naturally colder. Aviation fuel can also be contaminated with water (either through condensation or a deliberate method), causing water in the fuel lines, which would cause the engine to cut out.
When small aircraft crash, they often ignite a large fuel fire, destroying the aircraft and its occupants. That's because the wings of small aircraft are loaded with aviation fuel. Combined with sparks from the metal '-- or electrical sparks from the battery '-- it's very easy to ignite the aviation fuel, resulting in a massive explosion. Fortunately, that did not occur in this crash.
Note that civilian aviation has a very good safety track record overall, that is until the vaccine clot shots started causing pilots to lose consciousness and crash their planes. However, vaccines are clearly not the culprit in this crash. This appears to be something related to the fuel composition, fuel lines, or other mechanical causes. However, we won't know for sure unless an investigation is conducted and allowed to be carried out without the truth being covered up. We don't have much faith that the NTSB will do an honest job on this, since they are controlled by the same corrupt federal government that's trying to carry out genocide with vaccines.
For now, please pray for healing and a speedy recovery for Dr. Madej and her boyfriend.
Stay away from small aircraft, and avoid showing up anywhere in public where the time and location of your arrival is known in advance. These are very dangerous times, and people are being targeted for assassination.
The vaccine deep state will stop at nothing to silence the truth.
ARTICLE SOURCE
> U.S. Department of Defense > Contract
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 12:55
ARMY
Pfizer Inc., New York, New York, is awarded a $3,200,000,000 firm-fixed-price contract to manufacture, store and deliver mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Work will be performed in Kalamazoo, Michigan, with an estimated completion date of May 31, 2023. Fiscal 2022 American Rescue Plan Act, Defense Production Act funds in the amount of $3,200,000,000 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, is the contracting activity (W58P05-22-C-0016).
Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, Stratford, Connecticut, is awarded a $429,174,259 firm-fixed-price contract for maintenance and overhaul of UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters. Bids were solicited via the internet with one received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of June 28, 2027. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, is the contracting activity (W58RGZ-22-D-0002).
General Dynamics Land System Inc., Sterling Heights, Michigan, is awarded a $320,325,338 modification (P00050) to contract W56HZV-19-C-0036 for low-rate initial production and system technical services for the Mobile Protected Firepower. Work will be performed in Sterling Heights, Michigan; Anniston, Alabama; and Lima, Ohio, with an estimated completion date of Oct. 24, 2024. Fiscal 2022 research, development, test and evaluation, Army funds in the amount of $31,310,306 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Detroit Arsenal, Michigan, is the contracting activity. (Awarded June 28, 2022)
Bechtel National Incorporation, Reston, Virginia, is awarded a $71,121,288 modification (P00237) to contract W52P1J-09-C-0012 to extend the period of performance by five months at the Pueblo Chemical Agent-Destruction Pilot Plant. Work will be performed in Pueblo, Colorado, with an estimated completion date of Sept. 30, 2023. Fiscal 2022 research, development, test, and evaluation, Army funds in the amount of $0 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Rock Island, Illinois, is the contracting activity.
FLIR Unmanned Ground Systems Inc. Chelmsford, Massachusetts, is awarded a $62,068,240 firm-fixed-price contract for the Man Transportable Robotic System Increment II. Bids were solicited via the internet with five received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Oct. 2, 2023. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Detroit Arsenal, Michigan, is the contracting activity (W56HZV-22-F-0282).
Main Building Maintenance Inc., San Antonio, Texas, is awarded a $41,858,003 firm-fixed-price contract for healthcare environmental cleaning and related services at William Beaumont Army Medical Center. Bids were solicited via the internet with 13 received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of June 30, 2027. U.S. Army Health Contracting Activity, San Antonio, Texas, is the contracting activity (W81K04-22-D-0008).
Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company, Spring, Texas, was awarded a $25,480,000 firm-fixed-price contract for one base system and one test and development system super computer system. Bids were solicited via the internet with three received. Work will be performed in Vicksburg, Mississippi, with an estimated completion date of Jan. 25, 2028. Fiscal 2022 other procurement, Army funds in the amount of $25,480,000 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi, is the contracting activity (W912DY-22-F-0248).
Spider Strategies Inc.,* Arlington, Virginia, was awarded a $16,426,741 firm-fixed-price contract for strategic management system support services. Bids were solicited via the internet with one received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of July 2, 2024. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, is the contracting activity (W91CRB-22-D-0010).
NAVY
Reliance Test and Technology LLC, Crestview, Florida, is awarded an $80,831,607 cost-plus-fixed-fee, cost modification (P00019) to a previously awarded contract (N0042120C0033). This modification exercises an option to provide research, development, test, evaluation, engineering, fleet and management support services required to perform aircraft engineering and developmental flight test, as well as fleet training events for Navy and Marine Corps air vehicle systems and trainers in support of the Atlantic Ranges and Targets Department. Work will be performed in Patuxent River, Maryland (99%); and various locations within the continental U.S. (1%), and is expected to be completed in June 2023. Fiscal 2022 research, development, test, and evaluation (Navy) funds in the amount of $8,362,250; fiscal 2022 operation and maintenance (Navy) in the amount of $2,176,482; fiscal 2022 research, development, test, and evaluation (Department of Defense) funds in the amount of $507,554; and fiscal 2022 working capital (Navy) funds in the amount of $155,000 will be obligated at time of award, $2,176,482 of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Warfare Command, Aircraft Division, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity.
Raytheon Co., Tucson, Arizona, is awarded a $57,850,697 fixed-price-incentive-fee and cost-plus-incentive-fee modification to previously awarded contract N0002419C5412 to exercise options and incrementally fund existing contract line items for fiscal 2022 Standard Missile-2 Block IIIC low rate initial production and spares. Work will be performed in Huntsville, Alabama (73%); and Tucson, Arizona, (27%), and is expected to be completed by December 2024. Fiscal 2022 weapons procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $55,582,089 (96%); and fiscal 2022 research, development, test and evaluation (Navy) funds in the amount of $2,268,608 (4%) will be obligated at time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity.
Bechtel Plant Machinery Inc., Monroeville, Pennsylvania, is awarded a $32,658,642 cost-plus-fixed-fee modification to previously awarded contract N00024-19-C-2112 for naval nuclear propulsion components. Work will be performed in Monroeville, Pennsylvania (74%); and Schenectady, New York (26%). Fiscal 2022 other procurement (Navy) funding in the amount of $32,658,642 will be obligated at time of award and funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity.
Consolidated Analysis Center International (CACI) Inc., Chantilly, Virginia, is awarded a $27,338,600 cost-plus-fixed-fee contract. This contract provides engineering, technical and program management support services and associated supplies to support the development, production and sustainment of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance mission systems. Work will be performed in Austin, Texas (90%); and Patuxent River, Maryland (10%), and is expected to be completed in June 2023. Fiscal 2022 aircraft procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $100,000 will be obligated at the time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to 10 U.S. Code 2304(c)(1). The Naval Air Warfare Aircraft Division, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity (N0042122C0025).
Mercury Mission Systems LLC, Torrance, California, is awarded a $25,978,018 cost-plus-fixed-fee order (N6833522F0005) against a previously issued basic ordering agreement (N6833519G0041). This order provides non-recurring engineering for the development and delivery of flight qualification units for the Joint Avionics Reconfigurable Visual Information System digital video mapping computer upgrade that will interface with the F/A-18E/F and EA-18G mission computer, data transfer unit and other avionics in support of Small Business Innovation Research Phase III topic #N152-096 titled ''Miniaturized, Fault Tolerant Decentralized Mission Processing Architecture for Next Generation Rotorcraft Avionics Environment.'' Additionally, this effort will provide high definition video interfaces to two large area displays (LADs) with digital moving maps and other data. This upgrade will provide Aeronautical Radio Incorporated 818 compliant video output over high-speed video network at the full resolution and refresh rate required by the two LADs. Work will be performed in Torrance, California (95.2%); Atlanta, Georgia (2.7%); and Eden Prairie, Minnesota (2.1%), and is expected to be completed in August 2024. Fiscal 2022 research, development, test and evaluation (Navy) funds in the amount of $16,259,924; and fiscal 2021 research, development, test and evaluation (Navy) funds in the amount of $4,381,091 will be obligated at time of award, $4,381,091 of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Lakehurst, New Jersey, is the contracting activity.
L3Technologies Inc., MariPro, Goleta, California, is awarded a $14,492,140 firm-fixed-price modification (P00003) to a previously awarded contract (N6134021C0023). This modification exercises options to procure 180 km Barking Sands Tactical Underwater Range internode cable and 608 km Atlantic Undersea Test and Evaluation Center cable in support of the Under Sea Warfare Training Range Programs training ranges that are being developed off the shores of Hawaii, California and the Bahamas in support of the Navy's air, surface, and subsurface forces training and assessment in shallow and deep water under adverse conditions. Work will be performed in Tanner Bank, California (30%); San Clemente Island, California (23%); Goleta, California (21%); Kauai, Hawaii (14%); and Andros Island, Bahamas (12%), and is expected to be completed in June 2032. Fiscal 2022 research, development, test and evaluation (Navy) funds in the amount of $9,973,451; and fiscal 2022 other procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $4,518,689 will be obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division, Orlando, Florida, is the contracting activity.
DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY
SupplyCore Inc.,* Rockford, Illinois, has been awarded a maximum $60,000,000 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for facilities maintenance, repair and operations supplies. This was a sole-source acquisition using justification 10 U.S. Code 2304 (c)(1), as stated in the Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302-1. This is a 184-day bridge contract with no option periods. Location of performance is South Korea, with a Jan. 15, 2023, ordering period end date. Using customers are Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and Coast Guard. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2022 through 2023 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (SPE8E3-22-D-0011).
Connectec Co., Inc.,* Irvine, California, has been awarded a maximum $59,251,500 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for power distribution. This was a competitive acquisition with two responses received. This is a five-year contract with no option periods. The performance completion date is June 29, 2027. Using military service is Army. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2022 through 2027 Army working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime, Warren, Michigan (SPRDL1-22-D-0041).
*Small business
Age and sex-specific risks of myocarditis and pericarditis following Covid-19 messenger RNA vaccines | Nature Communications
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 12:52
AbstractCases of myocarditis and pericarditis have been reported following the receipt of Covid-19 mRNA vaccines. As vaccination campaigns are still to be extended, we aimed to provide a comprehensive assessment of the association, by vaccine and across sex and age groups. Using nationwide hospital discharge and vaccine data, we analysed all 1612 cases of myocarditis and 1613 cases of pericarditis that occurred in France in the period from May 12, 2021 to October 31, 2021. We perform matched case-control studies and find increased risks of myocarditis and pericarditis during the first week following vaccination, and particularly after the second dose, with adjusted odds ratios of myocarditis of 8.1 (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.7 to 9.9) for the BNT162b2 and 30 (95% CI, 21 to 43) for the mRNA-1273 vaccine. The largest associations are observed for myocarditis following mRNA-1273 vaccination in persons aged 18 to 24 years. Estimates of excess cases attributable to vaccination also reveal a substantial burden of both myocarditis and pericarditis across other age groups and in both males and females.
IntroductionOn July 19, 2021 the European Medicines Agency advised that myocarditis and pericarditis be added to the list of adverse effects of both messenger RNA (mRNA) based vaccines (BNT162b2 [Pfizer''BioNTech] and mRNA-1273 [Moderna]) against coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19)1. This statement followed pharmacovigilance reports of an increased risk of myocarditis among recipients of mRNA vaccines that showed certain common patterns2,3. Several reports indicate that adverse events typically occur within a week after injection, mostly after the second dose of vaccine, cluster in young males, and result in a mild clinical course and short duration of hospitalization4,5,6. However, the predominance of a vaccine-associated risk in males7 and its extent regarding pericarditis, as a specific condition, remains uncertain8,9,10,11. Population-based risks estimates for each condition and across sex and age groups and by vaccine type remains crucial as vaccination campaigns are still to be extended especially towards the youngest and with subsequent doses. The Covid-19 vaccination campaign began in France in late 2020 with the gradual roll-out of the two mRNA vaccines, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 alongside viral vector-based vaccines. Initially reserved for the oldest and most vulnerable groups, as well as healthcare professionals, vaccination was opened up to the entire population over the age of 18 years as of May 12, 2021, and to all over 12 years old as of June 15, 2021. As of October 31, 2021 approximately 50 million people (88% of the eligible population, i.e. over 12 years old) in France had received a full vaccination schedule12. Here, we aimed to estimate the age and sex-specific associations between each mRNA Covid-19 vaccine and the risk of myocarditis and pericarditis, using nationwide hospital discharge and vaccine data for France.
ResultsCharacteristics of the study populationBetween May 12, 2021 and October 31, 2021, within a population of 32 million persons aged 12 to 50 years, 21.2 million first (19.3 million second) doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine and 2.86 million first (2.58 million second) doses of the mRNA-1273 vaccine were received (Table S1). In the same period, 1612 cases of myocarditis (of which 87 [5.4%] had also a pericarditis as associated diagnosis) and 1613 cases of pericarditis (37 [2.3%] with myocarditis as associated diagnosis) were recorded in France. We matched those cases to 16,120 and 16,130 control subjects, respectively. The characteristics of the cases and their matched controls are shown in Table 1. For both myocarditis and pericarditis, key differences between cases and controls included a higher proportion among cases of a history of myocarditis or pericarditis, of history of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and receipt of an mRNA Covid-19 vaccine. The mean age and proportion of women were lower among patients with myocarditis than those with pericarditis.
Table 1 Characteristics of study cases and controls.Risk of myocarditis and pericarditis associated with vaccinationFor both vaccines, the risk of myocarditis was increased in the seven days post vaccination (Table 2; in the rest of the text, we will refer to multivariable odds ratios). For the BNT162b2 vaccine, odds ratios were 1.8 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3''2.5) for the first dose and 8.1 (95% CI, 6.7''9.9) for the second. The association was stronger for the mRNA-1273 vaccine with odds-ratios of 3.0 (95% CI, 1.4''6.2) for the first dose and 30 (95% CI, 21''43) for the second. The risk of pericarditis was increased in the seven days following the second dose of both vaccines, with odds ratios of 2.9 (95% CI, 2.3''3.8) for the BNT162b2 vaccine and 5.5 (95% CI, 3.3''9.0) for the mRNA-1273 vaccine. Vaccination in the previous 8 to 21 days, with either the BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccine was not associated with a risk of myocarditis or pericarditis. Independently of vaccination status, a history of myocarditis was strongly associated with a risk of contracting myocarditis during the study period, with an odds-ratios of 160 (95% CI, 83''330). The same was true for pericarditis, with an odds ratio of 250 (95% CI, 120''540). No interaction was found between history of myocarditis or pericarditis and vaccine exposure. Infection with SARS-CoV-2 in the preceding month was also associated with a risk of myocarditis (odds ratio, 9.0 [95% CI, 6.4''13]) or pericarditis (odds ratio, 4.0 [95% CI, 2.7''5.9]).
Table 2 Association between myocarditis and pericarditis and exposure to mRNA vaccines within 1 to 7 days and 8 to 21 days.Subgroup estimates by sex and age classesThe risk of myocarditis was substantially increased within the first week post vaccination in both males and females (Fig. 1 and Table S2). Odds-ratios associated with the second dose of the mRNA-1273 vaccine were consistently the highest, with values up to 44 (95% CI, 22''88) and 41 (95% CI, 12''140), respectively in males and females aged 18 to 24 years but remaining high in older age groups. Odds-ratios for the second dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine tended to decrease with age, from 18 (95% CI, 9''35) and 7.1 (95% CI, 1.5''33), respectively in males and females aged 12 to 17 years, down to 3.0 (95% CI, 1.5''5.9) and 1.9 (95% CI, 0.39''9.3), respectively in males and females aged 40 to 51 years.
Fig. 1: Association between myocarditis and exposure to mRNA vaccines within 7 days, according to sex and age group.Adjusted odds-ratio (aOR) from multivariable model are represented in base 10 logarithmic scale according to age groups (x-axis), by sex (columns) and vaccine dose ranking (rows). Colors denote the type of vaccine. Centre value are aOR point estimates and error bars represent 95% confidence intervals. Number of cases (N) by age categories (12''17, 18''24, 25''29, 30''39, 40''50 and 12''50 years) are respectively as follows: N'‰='‰137, 480, 210, 273, 181 and 1281 for males, and N'‰='‰29, 106, 40, 88, 68 and 331 for females. aOR could not be calculated in categories where no case exposed to vaccine was recorded, for instance for males and females aged 12 to 17 years having received the mRNA-1273 vaccine.
An increased risk of pericarditis was also found in the first week after the second dose of either of the mRNA vaccines among both males and females (Fig. 2 and Table S3). Odds-ratios for the second dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine showed a downward trend across age groups with values up to 6.8 (95% CI, 2.3''20) and 10 (95% CI, 2.5''41), respectively in males and females aged 12 to 17 years. The second dose of the mRNA-1273 vaccine was associated with pericarditis among males and among females only within age 30 to 39 years (odds-ratio 20 [95% CI, 3.5''110]) and age 40 to 50 years (odds-ratio 13 [95% CI, 3.5''49]).
Fig. 2: Association between pericarditis and exposure to mRNA vaccines within 7 days, according to sex and age group.Adjusted odds-ratio (aOR) from multivariable model are represented in base 10 logarithmic scale according to age groups (x-axis), by sex (columns) and vaccine dose ranking (rows). Colors denote the type of vaccine. Centre value are aOR point estimates and error bars represent 95% confidence intervals. Number of cases (N) by age categories (12''17, 18''24, 25''29, 30''39, 40''50 and 12''50 years) are respectively as follows: N'‰='‰65, 194, 106, 282, 342 and 989 for males, and N'‰='‰36, 118, 91, 183, 196 and 624 for females. aOR could not be calculated in categories where no case exposed to vaccine was recorded, for instance for males and females aged 12 to 17 years having received the mRNA-1273 vaccine.
Associations between vaccination within the seven preceding days and the risk of myocarditis or pericarditis were of the same magnitude when the analysis was restricted to the period prior to the warning against myocarditis and pericarditis as adverse events sent to prescribers on July 19, 2021 (Fig. S1 and Table S4). The results were unchanged in models excluding patients with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the past month, those with a history of myocarditis or pericarditis within five years, those diagnosed with both myocarditis and pericarditis, or those with a hospitalization within a month prior to index date.
Excess eventsWe estimated the number of excess cases attributable to vaccines by sex and age group (Fig. 3). The number of excess cases of myocarditis per 100,000 doses administered to adolescent males 12 to 17 years was 1.9 (95% CI, 1.4''2.6) for the second dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine and for young adults 18 to 24 years of age reached 4.7 (95% CI, 3.8''5.8) for the second dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine, and 17 (95% CI, 13''23) for the second dose of the mRNA-1273 vaccine (Fig. 3). This translates into one case of vaccine-associated myocarditis per 52,300 (95% CI, 38,200''74,100) second doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine among 12''17 years, and 21,100 (95% CI, 17,400''26,000) second doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine and 5900 (95% CI, 4400''8000) second doses of the mRNA-1273 vaccine among 18''24 years (Table S5). Estimates of excess cases were lower for older age groups and generally for females. However, the number of excess cases of myocarditis attributable to the second dose of the mRNA-1273 vaccine was consistently higher. Among females aged 18 to 24 years, the estimated number of excess cases of myocarditis per 100,000 doses reached 0.63 (95% CI, 0.34''1.1) for the second dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine (corresponding to 1 case per 159,000 [95% CI, 90,800''294,400] doses) and 5.3 (95% CI, 3.0''9.1) for the second dose of the mRNA-1273 vaccine (corresponding to 1 case per 18,700 [95% CI, 11,000''33,400] doses). The number of excess cases of pericarditis is presented in Fig. 3. As for myocarditis, estimates for the second dose of the mRNA-1273 vaccine were consistently higher.
Fig. 3: Excess cases of myocarditis and pericarditis attributable to mRNA vaccines according to sex and age group, per 100,000 doses.Excess cases are based on the risk in the 7 days following vaccination. Colors denote the type of vaccine and the shape of point estimate denotes the ranking of dose vaccine. Centre value are excess cases point estimates and error bars represent 95% confidence intervals. Number of cases (N) by age categories (12''17, 18''24, 25''29, 30''39, 40''50 and 12''50 years) are respectively as follows: for cases of myocarditis, N'‰='‰137, 480, 210, 273, 181 and 1281 in males, and N'‰='‰29, 106, 40, 88, 68 and 331 in females; for cases of pericarditis, N'‰='‰65, 194, 106, 282, 342 and 989 in males, and N'‰='‰36, 118, 91, 183, 196 and 624 in females. Excess cases was only calculated in categories with a significantly positive association between the vaccine exposure and the outcome (adjusted odds-ratio'‰>1).
Characteristics of myocarditis and pericarditis cases occurring after vaccinationAmong exposed cases, the delay between administration of the vaccine and hospitalization (Fig. S2) was shorter after the second dose than after the first dose, both for myocarditis (median of 4 days versus 10 days after the BNT162b2 vaccine and of 3.5 days versus 9 days after the mRNA-1273 vaccine) and for pericarditis (median of 6 days versus 10 days after the BNT162b2 vaccine and of 3 days versus 11 days after the mRNA-1273 vaccine).
Table 3 shows the characteristics of cases acquired within 7 days of vaccination (deemed post-vaccination cases) compared to those acquired within a larger delay or in the absence of vaccination. Post-vaccination cases were significantly younger (predominantly in 18 to 24 years), more frequently concerned males for myocarditis but not for pericarditis, and without a history of myocarditis or pericarditis, respectively, or of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The lengths of hospital stay were not significantly different in post-vaccination cases of myocarditis (median 4 days) and pericarditis (median 2 days) than in unexposed cases. The frequency of admission in intensive care unit, mechanical ventilation or death was lower for post-vaccination cases than for unexposed cases. After a follow-up of 30 days after discharge, 4 (0.24%) deaths among cases of myocarditis (none among exposed to vaccine) and 5 (0.31%) deaths among cases of pericarditis (including one patient having received a vaccine 8 to 21 days prior to the diagnosis) were reported. Of those, 3 and 2 died during their hospital stay for myocarditis and pericarditis, respectively.
Table 3 Description of hospitalized patients according to the exposure to mRNA vaccines.Drugs treatments within 30 days after hospital discharge are presented in Figs. S3 and S4. Regardless of the vaccination status, the therapeutic classes most frequently used during the follow-up of myocarditis cases included beta blocking agents (63% of patients), analgesics (52%) and agents acting on the renin''angiotensin system (46%). The corresponding treatments of pericarditis cases were analgesics (83%), colchicine (69%) and beta blocking agents (14%) (Fig. S4).
DiscussionIn this nationwide study involving a population of 32 million people aged 12 to 50 years having received 46 million doses of mRNA vaccines, we provide detailed estimates of the risk of myocarditis and pericarditis by sex, age categories and vaccine type. We find that vaccination with both mRNA vaccines was associated with an increased risk of myocarditis and pericarditis within the first week after vaccination. The associations were particularly pronounced after the second dose, and were evident in both males and females. We found a trend of increased risks towards younger age groups but a significant risk was also found in males over 30 years to develop myocarditis and in females over 30 years to develop a pericarditis after vaccination. Reassuringly, these cases of myocarditis and pericarditis, although requiring hospitalization, did not result in more severe outcomes than those unrelated to vaccination.
Our results are generally consistent with those reported by the pharmacovigilance systems in France and other countries8,13,14,15,16. Several common factors in terms of the characteristics and prognosis of cases identified, and the temporal relationship between vaccine exposure and the event of interest, suggest a consistent underlying mechanism5,6,17,18. As found in our analyses, various reports indicate that the risk is more pronounced with the mRNA-1273 vaccine7,10,19,20, even though there was no difference in rates between the two vaccines in the passive surveillance reporting in the US4.
Our findings bring new elements in showing that the risk of acute cardiac inflammation after vaccination is not confined to myocarditis in young men4,5,6,14. First, in line with results from a cohort study in Nordic countries11, our analyses show a significant risk and population burden of pericarditis following the second dose of the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccine. Often comprised in a combined outcome of myopericarditis7,19,21, pericarditis as specific entity has been less studied for its association with mRNA vaccines, and even more rarely regarding the mRNA-12173 vaccine. For the BNT162b2 vaccine, results are inconsistent with either reports of a positive association11,18 or an absence of association8,9,10. Barda et al. and Lai et al. found a non-significant risk ratio of 1.27 and odds ratio of 1.06, respectively, for the combined effect of first and second dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine8,9. Patone et al. found a non-significant relative incidence of pericarditis in the week after both doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine of approximately 0.6, while the association with mRNA-1273 could not be quantified10. Considering that the risk of myocarditis following the BNT162b2 vaccine is also found lower in the later study than in others, we hypothesized that the probably weaker association with pericarditis might be more difficult to reveal. This discrepancy could also reflect different diagnostic practices as pericarditis is a retrospective diagnosis of exclusion.
Second, by differentiating the risk between adolescent (aged 12 to 17 years) and young men or women (18''25 years), we estimate that the number of excess cases after the second dose of BNT162b2 vaccine is lower in adolescents compared to young adults. This is consistent with findings from surveillance data in Israel22 but in contrast with those from the US4. There is some support for the role of sex hormones in the increased susceptibility for myocarditis of young men compared to women23,24,25. While we do find higher absolute burden of myocarditis and pericarditis in adolescent males and men, we also find that the female counterpart also faces a significant risk, notably of pericarditis for women over 30 years after the second dose of the mRNA-1273 vaccine, which has not yet been shown.
There are several factors that support the hypothesis of a causal relationship between exposure to mRNA vaccines and the risk of myocarditis and pericarditis. First, the associations remained strong, even after adjusting for a history of these conditions or recent SARS-CoV-2 infection, and in a period during which most common respiratory viruses were not widely circulating26,27. Second, the time that elapsed between exposure to the vaccine and hospitalization was very short for both conditions, particularly after the second dose. Third, in most cases, the associations did not persist after seven days following exposure. Fourth, the stronger risk associated with the second dose and the mRNA-1273 vaccine, which contains a larger amount of mRNA, suggest a dose response relationship28.
The strengths of our study include the large sample size, population-based character and the assessment of cases and exposure to vaccines in high-quality and comprehensive databases. It allowed us to include 1612 confirmed cases of myocarditis and 1613 of pericarditis, occurring in a period during which 46 million doses of the two mRNA vaccines were administered. This study provides population estimates of vaccine associated risk and burden at a national level, which cannot be informed by passive case notification surveillance. Furthermore, results were consistent after adjusting for other risk factors, including SARS-CoV-2 infection, and different periods.
Our study has several limitations. First, the National Health Data System provides little clinical and no laboratory information concerning cases. The cases included in this study were identified solely on the basis of the diagnosis codes associated with hospital admissions. We therefore could not detect asymptomatic or mild forms of myocarditis and pericarditis that would not require hospitalization. Nevertheless, the incidence of myocarditis and pericarditis before the Covid-19 pandemic, estimated using the SNDS data, is consistent with the figures reported by other countries14. Furthermore, the observed durations of stay and post-discharge treatments were consistent with typical presentations of these conditions. Second, while our assessment of severity indicators within four weeks post-discharge indicates a favourable clinical outcome of post-vaccination carditis in their acute phase, we could not investigate potential long-term consequences. Third, we did not study the Covid-19 booster vaccination which was not yet recommended for healthy younger adults in our study period. Finally, associations across age and sex subgroups could not always be quantified for both vaccines or only with a considerable degree of uncertainty due to the limited time span of observation. The extent of the risk for certain subgroups, especially among women, for whom the incidence appears to be lower, warrants further studies and meta-analyses26,29.
In conclusion, this study provides strong evidence of an increased risk of myocarditis and of pericarditis in the week following vaccination against Covid-19 with mRNA vaccines in both males and females, in particular after the second dose of the mRNA-1273 vaccine. Future studies based on an extended period of observation will allow to investigate the risk related to the booster dose of the vaccines and monitoring the long-term consequences of these post vaccination acute inflammations.
MethodsStudy designWe conducted a matched case-control study within the entire French population between 12 and 50 years of age for myocarditis and pericarditis, treating each condition separately. The study focused on the period from May 12, 2021, to October 31, 2021, during which the Covid-19 vaccination campaign was opened to individuals under 50 years of age.
Data sources and study populationThe study was based on data of the National Health Data System (SNDS) which covers more than 99% of the French population (67 million inhabitants)30,31. Data on hospital admission were obtained from the French hospital discharge database (PMSI) and linked at the individual level with the nationwide databases for Covid-19 vaccination (VAC-SI) and testing (SI-DEP). Cases corresponded to all patients admitted to French hospitals with a diagnosis of myocarditis or pericarditis in the study period. Diagnoses at hospital were typically based on presenting symptoms, electrocardiography, echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging32,33. We used the codes for myocarditis (I40.x, I41.x, and I51.4) and pericarditis (I30.x and I32.x) of the International Classification of diseases, 10th revision (ICD-10) for detection. Although the data were comprehensive up to September 2021, at the time this study was conducted, approximately 78% of hospital stays for October 2021 had been entered into the PMSI database. Each case was matched at the date of his/her hospital admission for myocarditis or pericarditis (index date) to 10 control individuals. Controls were selected from among the whole population by simple random sampling without replacement within each stratum of age, gender and area of residence (matching criteria), with constraint of not being diagnosed with myocarditis or pericarditis and being alive at the index date.
Our research group (EPI-PHARE) has a regulatory permanent access to the data from the SNDS. This permanent access is given according the French Decree No. 2016-1871 of December 26, 2016 relating to the processing of personal data called ''National Health Data System'' and French law articles Art. R. 1461-13 and 14. This study was declared prior to initiation on the EPI-PHARE registry of studies requiring the use of the SNDS (n° EP-0311). No informed consent was required because data are anonymized.
Exposure and covariatesExposure was defined as vaccination with an mRNA vaccine 1 to 7 days or 8 to 21 days prior to the index date, considering the first and second dose separately. Non-vaccinated subjects, and those vaccinated more than 21 days before the index date were considered to be non-exposed. In addition to the matching variables, three covariates potentially associated with a risk of myocarditis or pericarditis, and with vaccine exposure were considered. A prior history of myocarditis or pericarditis was defined as a hospital admission with an ICD-10 code for myocarditis or pericarditis (cf. above) in the five years preceding the index date. A history of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection was defined by hospital admission for Covid-19 or a positive polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR) or antigenic testing 30 days prior to the index date. The socioeconomic level was defined by a deprivation index, summarized in two categories34.
Statistical analysisWe used conditional logistic regression models to estimate the odds ratios (OR) of myocarditis and pericarditis associated with exposure to recent vaccination, adjusted for covariates and matching variables35. Analyses were conducted with reference to the ranking of vaccine dose (first or second dose) and the time elapsed since vaccination (1 to 7 days or 8 to 21 days), across the study group as a whole and separately for males and females and according to five age brackets (12''17, 18''24, 25''29, 30''39 and 40 to 50 years). Associations were measured relative to the most recent exposure. We estimated the number of cases attributable to vaccine exposure using the odds ratio as an estimate of relative risk and assuming a causal relationship36. We then derived two measures of population burden using information on exposure to vaccines across the 32.2 million people aged 12 to 50 years, including the vaccine type and date of receipt of each dose (Table S1). First, the number of doses required for the occurrence of a vaccine-associated case was estimated as the ratio of doses administered to the number of attributable cases. Second, the number of excess cases per 100,000 doses was derived by inverting this ratio. We applied a correction factor to the numbers of exposed cases to account for under-reporting of hospitalizations in October 2021. Confidence intervals for the number of cases attributable to exposure were obtained by application of the delta-method37,38. We assessed the sensitivity of the results to a potential ascertainment bias by performing an analysis restricted to the time period before July 19, 2021, i.e. before myocarditis and pericarditis were officially announced as adverse events of mRNA vaccines. Additional analyses were conducted by excluding (i) patients with a previous history of myocarditis or pericarditis, (ii) those with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection, (iii) patients having both diagnoses of myocarditis and pericarditis, and (iv) persons with a hospitalization within 28 days of index date. Data collection used SAS Enterprise Guide version 4.3 software (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina). All analyses were performed using R software version 4.1.3, and survival package version 3.2''1339,40.
Reporting summaryFurther information on research design is available in the Nature Research Reporting Summary linked to this article.
Data availabilityAccording to data protection and the French regulation, the authors cannot publicly release the data from the French national health data system (SNDS). However, any person or structure, public or private, for-profit or non-profit, is able to access SNDS data upon authorization from the French Data Protection Office (CNIL Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libert(C)s) to carry out a study, a research, or an evaluation of public interest (https://www.snds.gouv.fr/SNDS/Processus-d-acces-aux-donnees and https://www.indsante.fr/).
Code availabilityThe code to reproduce the analyses presented in the paper is publicly available41.
ReferencesMeeting highlights from the Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee (PRAC) 3''6 May 2021. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/meeting-highlights-pharmacovigilance-risk-assessment-committee-prac-3-6-may-2021 (2021).
Gargano, J. W. et al. Use of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine after reports of myocarditis among vaccine recipients: update from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices '-- United States, June 2021. MMWR Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 70, 977''982 (2021).
CAS Article Google Scholar
Surveillance of Myocarditis (Inflammation of the Heart Muscle) Cases Between December 2020 and May 2021 (Including). https://www.gov.il/en/departments/news/01062021-03 (2021).
Oster, M. E. et al. Myocarditis cases reported after mRNA-Based COVID-19 vaccination in the US From December 2020 to August 2021. JAMA 327, 331''340 (2022).
CAS Article Google Scholar
Mevorach, D. et al. Myocarditis after BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine against Covid-19 in Israel. N. Engl. J. Med. 2140''2149 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2109730 (2021).
Witberg, G. et al. Myocarditis after Covid-19 vaccination in a Large Health Care Organization. N. Engl. J. Med. 2132''2139 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2110737 (2021).
Husby, A. et al. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and myocarditis or myopericarditis: population based cohort study. BMJ e068665 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2021-068665 (2021).
Barda, N. et al. Safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine in a Nationwide Setting. N. Engl. J. Med. 1078''1090 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2110475 (2021).
Lai, F. T. T. et al. Carditis after COVID-19 vaccination with a messenger RNA vaccine and an inactivated virus vaccine. Ann. Intern. Med. https://doi.org/10.7326/M21-3700 (2022).
Patone, M. et al. Risks of myocarditis, pericarditis, and cardiac arrhythmias associated with COVID-19 vaccination or SARS-CoV-2 infection. Nat. Med. 1''13 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-021-01630-0 (2021).
EMA. Signal assessment report on Myocarditis, pericarditis with Tozinameran. https://www.ema.europa.eu/documents/prac-recommendation/signal-assessment-report-myocarditis-pericarditis-tozinameran-covid-19-mrna-vaccine_en.pdf (2021).
Le tableau de bord de la vaccination. https://solidarites-sante.gouv.fr/grands-dossiers/vaccin-covid-19/article/le-tableau-de-bord-de-la-vaccination (2021).
Enquªte de pharmacovigilance du vaccin COVID'19 VACCINE MODERNA. https://ansm.sante.fr/uploads/2021/10/22/20211021-covid-19-vaccins-moderna-focus-1-2.pdf (2021).
Bozkurt, B., Kamat, I. & Hotez, P. J. Myocarditis with COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. Circulation 144, 471''484 (2021).
CAS Article Google Scholar
Klein, N. Myocarditis Analyses in the Vaccine Safety Datalink: Rapid Cycle Analyses and ''Head-to-Head'' Product Comparisons. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2021-10-20-21/08-COVID-Klein-508.pdf (2021).
Dagan, N., Barda, N. & Balicer, R. D. Adverse effects after BNT162b2 vaccine and SARS-CoV-2 infection, according to age and sex. N. Engl. J. Med. 2299 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc2115045 (2021).
Klein, N. P. et al. Surveillance for adverse events after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination. JAMA 326, 1390''1399 (2021).
CAS Article Google Scholar
Diaz, G. A. et al. Myocarditis and pericarditis after vaccination for COVID-19. JAMA 326, 1210''1212 (2021).
CAS Article Google Scholar
Su, J. R. Myopericarditis following COVID-19 vaccination: Updates from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2021-10-20-21/07-COVID-Su-508.pdf (2021).
Lane, S. & Shakir, S. Reports of myocarditis and pericarditis following mRNA COVID-19 vaccines: A review of spontaneously reported data from the UK, Europe, and the US. 2021.09.09.21263342 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.09.09.21263342v1, https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.09.09.21263342 (2021).
Chua, G. T. et al. Epidemiology of Acute Myocarditis/Pericarditis in Hong Kong Adolescents Following Comirnaty Vaccination. Clin. Infect. Dis. Off. Publ. Infect. Dis. Soc. Am. ciab989. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciab989 (2021).
Mevorach, D. et al. Myocarditis after BNT162b2 vaccination in Israeli adolescents. N. Engl. J. Med. 998''999. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc2116999 (2022).
Kyt¶, V., Sipil¤, J. & Rautava, P. The effects of gender and age on occurrence of clinically suspected myocarditis in adulthood. Heart 99, 1681''1684 (2013).
Article Google Scholar
Fairweather, D., Cooper, L. T. & Blauwet, L. A. Sex and gender differences in myocarditis and dilated cardiomyopathy. Curr. Probl. Cardiol. 38, 7''46 (2013).
Article Google Scholar
Heymans, S. & Cooper, L. T. Myocarditis after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination: clinical observations and potential mechanisms. Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 1''3. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41569-021-00662-w (2021).
Tsch¶pe, C. et al. Myocarditis and inflammatory cardiomyopathy: current evidence and future directions. Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 18, 169''193 (2021).
Article Google Scholar
Launay, T. et al. Common communicable diseases in the general population in France during the COVID-19 pandemic. PLOS ONE 16, e0258391 (2021).
CAS Article Google Scholar
Li, X. et al. Myocarditis following COVID-19 BNT162b2 vaccination among adolescents in Hong Kong. JAMA Pediatr. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2022.0101 (2022).
Hernn, M. A. Causal analyses of existing databases: no power calculations required. J. Clin. Epidemiol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.08.028 (2021).
Semenzato, L. et al. Chronic diseases, health conditions and risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization and in-hospital mortality during the first wave of the epidemic in France: a cohort study of 66 million people. Lancet Reg. Health '' Eur. 8 (2021).
Bezin, J. et al. The national healthcare system claims databases in France, SNIIRAM and EGB: powerful tools for pharmacoepidemiology. Pharmacoepidemiol. Drug Saf. 26, 954''962 (2017).
Article Google Scholar
H(C)kimian, G. et al. Diagnostic et prise en charge des myocardites. M(C)decine Intensive R(C)animation https://doi.org/10.1007/s13546-017-1273-4 (2017).
Adler, Y. et al. 2015 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of pericardial diseases: The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Management of Pericardial Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)Endorsed by: The European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur. Heart J. 36, 2921''2964 (2015).
Article Google Scholar
Rey, G., Jougla, E., Fouillet, A. & H(C)mon, D. Ecological association between a deprivation index and mortality in France over the period 1997''2001: variations with spatial scale, degree of urbanicity, age, gender and cause of death. BMC Public Health 9, 33 (2009).
Article Google Scholar
Rothman, K. J., Greenland, S. & Lash, T. L. Modern Epidemiology. (Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2008).
Coughlin, S. S., Benichou, J. & Weed, D. L. Attributable risk estimation in case-control studies. Epidemiol. Rev. 16, 51''64 (1994).
CAS Article Google Scholar
Greenland, S. Variance estimators for attributable fraction estimates consistent in both large strata and sparse data. Stat. Med. 6, 701''708 (1987).
CAS Article Google Scholar
Steenland, K. & Armstrong, B. An overview of methods for calculating the burden of disease due to specific risk factors. Epidemiology 17, 512''519 (2006).
Article Google Scholar
R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. https://www.R-project.org/ (2019).
Therneau, T. A package for survival analysis in R. 96 (2021).
Le Vu, S. myope2. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6583550.
Download references
Author informationAuthors and AffiliationsEPIPHARE Scientific Interest Group in Epidemiology of Health Products, (French National Agency for the Safety of Medicines and Health Products - ANSM, French National Health Insurance - CNAM), Saint-Denis, France
St(C)phane Le Vu, Marion Bertrand, Marie-Joelle Jabagi, J(C)r(C)mie Botton, J(C)r´me Drouin, B(C)rang¨re Baricault, Alain Weill, Rosemary Dray-Spira & Mahmoud Zureik
Facult(C) de Pharmacie, Universit(C) Paris-Saclay, 92296, Chtenay-Malabry, France
J(C)r(C)mie Botton
University Paris-Saclay, UVSQ, University Paris-Sud, Inserm, Anti-infective evasion and pharmacoepidemiology, CESP, Montigny le Bretonneux, France
Mahmoud Zureik
ContributionsS.L.V., M.B., A.W., R.D.S. and M.Z. conceived the study. A.W., R.D.S. and M.Z. supervised the project. M.B. and J.D. carried out the clinical data collection and data curation. S.L.V. and M.B. designed and performed the statistical analyses with M.J.J., B.B. and J.B. providing input. S.L.V. wrote the first draft of the manuscript. All authors interpreted the results, provided critical revision of the manuscript and approved its final version for submission.
Corresponding authorCorrespondence to St(C)phane Le Vu.
Ethics declarations Competing interestsThe authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review Peer review informationNature Communications thanks Ian Wong and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Peer reviewer reports are available.
Additional informationPublisher's note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary informationRights and permissionsOpen Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Reprints and Permissions
About this articleCite this articleLe Vu, S., Bertrand, M., Jabagi, MJ. et al. Age and sex-specific risks of myocarditis and pericarditis following Covid-19 messenger RNA vaccines. Nat Commun 13, 3633 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-31401-5
Download citation
Received : 25 February 2022
Accepted : 15 June 2022
Published : 25 June 2022
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-31401-5
CommentsBy submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.
The NATO to TikTok Pipeline: Why is TikTok Employing So Many National Security Agents?
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 12:51
C ULVER CITY, CALIFORNIA '' As the bloody conflict in Ukraine continues to escalate, so does the online propaganda war between Russia and the West. A prime example of this is the White House directly briefing influencers on popular social media app TikTok about the war and how to cover it. As the crisis spirals out of control, Americans have turned to TikTok to view real time videos and analysis of the invasion. With the app estimated to have around 70 million U.S. users, the White House is keenly aware of its impact. ''We recognize this is a critically important avenue in the way the American public is finding out about the latest '... so we wanted to make sure you had the latest information from an authoritative source,'' President Joe Biden's director of digital strategy, Rob Flaherty, told 30 top TikTok influencers.
TikTok itself has taken steps to align itself with U.S. government policy, deleting more than 320,000 Russian accounts and removing at least 41,000 videos peddling misinformation about the war. In addition to this, it has placed warning labels marked ''Russia state-controlled media'' on 49 accounts linked to the Russian government. Like other big social media platforms, it has not done the same to Western state-owned outlets such as the BBC, RT‰, or the CBC.
All this is a far cry from 2020, when President Donald Trump signed an order that would shut down TikTok within 45 days unless it was sold to an American buyer. The Chinese-owned platform, the U.S. government alleged, posed a severe national security threat to the United States. Although TikTok is a Chinese company, it is, ironically, completely blocked inside China, their domestic market being served by a sister app, Douyin, which functions in a similar way but is separated by the Great Firewall. Thus, there is no contact or overlap between the two. After Douyin's success in China, its parent company ByteDance launched a global platform.
ByteDance first reached a deal to sell TikTok to Microsoft, then to Oracle and Walmart. Yet the new Biden administration, without explanation, quietly dropped the sale requirement indefinitely in early 2021, saying in a court filing that it had begun a review of security concerns cited by the Trump administration.
That decision left buyers and onlookers alike perplexed. Yet studying the backgrounds of dozens of key TikTok employees brought on since the 2020 scare suggests that, instead of destroying TikTok, perhaps the U.S. national security state has co-opted it instead.
High-placed NATO recruitsSince 2020, there has been a wave of former spooks, spies and mandarins appointed to influential positions within TikTok, particularly around content and policy '' some of whom, on paper at least, appear unqualified for such roles.
For example, while simultaneously being the Content Policy Lead for TikTok Canada, Alexander Corbeil is also the vice president of the NATO Association of Canada, a NATO-funded organization chaired by former Canadian Minister of Defense David Collenette. In order to join TikTok, Corbeil left his job at the SecDev Foundation, a U.S. State Department-funded security think tank. Corbeil's work focused on Middle Eastern security and in particular on the war in Syria and what NATO's role should be.
Another NATO-linked new recruit is Ayse Ko§ak, a Global Product Policy manager at the company. Before joining TikTok last year, she spent three years at NATO. Like Corbeil, Ko§ak had special expertise in Middle Eastern politics, including a year's tour in Iraq as the organization's deputy senior civilian representative.
Foard Copeland, who works on TikTok's trust and safety policy, is also an ex-NATO man. Copeland previously worked as a desk officer for NATO, as well as for the Department of Defense. Between 2011 and 2021, he also worked for U.S. contractor Development Alternatives Incorporated (DAI), spending much of that time in Afghanistan. DAI has long been accused of being a CIA front group, perhaps with some justification. In 2009, for example, DAI agent Alan Gross was arrested in Cuba and sentenced to 15 years in prison for spying, espionage, and his part in efforts to destabilize the government.
Perhaps the most worrying NATO alumnus, from a public perspective, is new Feature Policy Manager Greg Andersen. According to his own LinkedIn profile, until 2019, Andersen worked on ''psychological operations'' for NATO. This fact, according to MintPress contributor Lowkey, was removed after his tweet raising concerns about the relationship between big tech and the national security state went viral. Lowkey wrote:
Andersen's profile continues to identify him as a former NATO employee, but there is no reference to ''psychological operations'' or ''soldier-system lethality.'' Lowkey provided MintPress with a screenshot of what he said was Andersen's pre-tweet profile, which has been included below.
Not just NATONATO, however, is far from the only organization newly connected to TikTok. The company's new Global Lead of Integrity and Authenticity, Chris Roberts, is a former senior director of Technology Policy at the Albright Stonebridge Group (ASG), a powerhouse strategy and consulting firm started by late-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. The ASG has been perhaps the major staffing source for President Biden's administration, with at least 10 ASG employees appointed to key positions in national security, state and foreign policy positions.
Before ASG, Roberts worked, in his own words, on ''special projects'' for the National Democratic Institute (NDI). The NDI was founded by the Reagan administration after a series of CIA scandals necessitated the creation of a network of front groups to take the heat off the agency. The NDI exists to channel U.S. government money, training and support to political and social groups around the world. This could charitably be described as ''democracy promotion,'' although cynics might label it ''overthrowing governments.'' As Roberts himself said, ''The nature of democracy promotion is that the most important countries to work in are also the ones where the government may not want your 'help.'''
At TikTok, Roberts' role is to ''Lead the Integrity and Authenticity policy team. This team covers misinformation, synthetic and manipulated media, covert influence activity, and spam and inauthentic engagement.''
One group infamous for peddling misinformation and carrying out covert operations is the CIA. Yet rather than identifying operations, they might be conducting, TikTok has instead recruited a former agent to serve in an important position. Since January, Beau Patteson has been working as a threat analyst for TikTok's Trust and Safety Division. Between 2017 and 2020, however, Patteson was a targeting analyst for the CIA, after which he joined the State Department to become a foreign service officer. In addition to his role at TikTok, Patteson is also, according to his social media profile, a military intelligence officer in the United States Army.
One step closer to the halls of power is Victoria McCullough, who previously worked for the Department of Homeland Security and for the White House itself. Like Patteson, McCullough now works on trust and safety at TikTok. Another trust-and-safety TikTok staff member, Christian Cardona, spent nearly 13 years in senior roles at the State Department across the Middle East and Europe before seamlessly moving to the social media giant.
Virtually every former spook or state official this investigation found works in very specific (and highly politically sensitive) fields such as trust, safety and content moderation, rather than in banal areas like marketing, customer service or sales. Yet TikTok's new recruits come from some of the least trustworthy organizations anywhere in the world '' organizations that should not be anywhere near the levers of power of such a popular platform.
The national security state has been the source of some of the most outlandish and damaging fake news claims in recent years. This includes lurid allegations about so-called ''Havana Syndrome'' and the ''BountyGate'' hoax. Going further back, falsehoods about weapons of mass destruction or an immiment genocide helped push the U.S. to war in Iraq and Libya, respectively. Yet individuals from many of these institutions are now in charge of deciding what is real and what is fake, and which content to promote or suppress.
In this light, the 2020 pandemonium about TikTok being a national security threat looks increasingly like a power play from the national security state. These dire warnings, and even the threat to completely shut down its platform, subsided only after TikTok began appointing Western officials to important positions within its organization, thereby giving the state considerable influence over the content and direction of the app.
Serious businessReaders who consider TikTok little more than a fun app to watch short videos of people dancing are behind the times. From a modest beginning, it has exploded in popularity, growing exponentially from 85 million global users in early 2018 to 1.2 billion by late 2021 (with a similar monstrous growth in revenue to boot).
It is exceptionally popular among the younger generations. The 2021 Reuters Institute Digital News Report found that 9% of people aged between 18 and 24 worldwide had gone to TikTok to get news over the past week, while 31% of that age group used the app in that period (and therefore likely passively consumed news to some extent). Furthermore, it has a very loyal user base, with the tens of millions of U.S. TikTok users spending an average of 68 minutes per day on the platform.
Thus, TikTok has become an enormously influential medium that reaches over one billion people worldwide. Having control over its algorithm or content moderation means the ability to set the terms of global debate and decide what people see and do not see. MintPress invited TikTok to comment on its relationship with the government, but has not received a response.
Surveillance ValleyThis is far from the first time the national security state has pulled this trick, however. In 2018, Facebook came under enormous pressure from the U.S. government, with CEO Mark Zuckerberg himself being hauled in front of both the House and the Senate to face hours of grilling over the platform's role in privacy, content moderation and spreading Russian disinformation. Only weeks after this, Facebook announced a new partnership with the Atlantic Council, whereby the group would serve as Facebook's ''eyes and ears,'' taking considerable control over its content moderation, supposedly in an effort to weed out fake news and disinformation. The Atlantic Council, however, is NATO's think tank and serves as its brain trust, with no fewer than seven former CIA directors on its board. Since then, Facebook (or Meta, as it is officially known), appointed former NATO Press Officer and current Atlantic Council Senior Fellow Ben Nimmo to serve as its head of intelligence. In addition, Facebook's new global director of content policy, Mark Smith, was formerly employed by NATO as an advisor to its deputy commander.
The Atlantic Council has also found its way into Reddit's management. In 2017, Jessica Ashooh went straight from being deputy director of Middle East strategy at The Atlantic Council to director of policy at the popular news aggregation service '' an unusual career move that drew few remarks at the time. Like Corbeil, Ko§ak and others, Ashooh was a Middle East specialist and was intimately involved in the West's war in Syria. For years, Reddit took a free-speech absolutist position, even defending hosting clearly illegal sexual content. However, Ashooh's arrival coincided with a new era of far more forceful moderation. Reddit recently took the decision to not only ban links from Russian state media outlets, but all websites with a Russian (.ru) domain.
Likewise, a number of key Twitter personnel raise eyebrows. Chief among them is Head of Editorial for Europe, the Middle East and Africa Gordon MacMillan, who, in addition to his duties at Twitter, is an officer in the British Army's 77th Brigade '' a notorious unit dedicated to online warfare and psychological operations. Like Facebook, Twitter has partnered with some highly questionable state-linked organizations, giving them considerable influence over its content moderation.
Meanwhile, Google's current global head of Developer Product Policy, Ben Renda, was formerly a strategic planner and information management officer for NATO, before working for both U.S. Cyber Command and the Department of Defense.
Big Tech a big weaponThe U.S. government, it appears, refuses to allow any competition to its hegemony over the digital realm. Huawei has effectively been banned throughout much of the West, with the United States refusing to allow the Chinese giant to control the new network of 5G communications. U.S. attempts to convince other nations to block Huawei have elicited significant pushback in the Global South. ''If you are ahead, I will ban you, I will send warships to your country'...That is not competition, that is threatening people,'' said Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir bin Mohamad, commenting on U.S. actions. Decades earlier, the U.S. government effectively destroyed the Japanese semiconductor industry, forcing Japan to sign a one-sided trade deal while imposing a 100% tariff on Japanese electronics '' a power play that led to a decades-long recession from which the island nation has never recovered.
In 2020, the U.S. government even forced Chinese-owned Grindr to be sold to a U.S. company, deeming the LGBT dating app to be a ''national security threat.''
In every accusation, it is said, there is a confession. That Washington considers even frivolous hookup apps to be too important to be outside of U.S. control, lest they be used to influence the public, suggests they know exactly what they are doing, infiltrating big tech companies. Indeed, this was more or less confirmed earlier this month by a letter written by a host of top natsec officials, including former CIA Directors Michael Morell and Leon Panetta, and former Assistant to the President for Counterterrorism and Homeland Security Frances Townsend (all of whom also sit on the Atlantic Council's board of directors).
The officials advised that breaking up Silicon Valley giants, as many have advocated, would ''inadvertently hamper the ability of U.S. technology platforms to '... push back on the Kremlin.'' ''The United States will need to rely on the power of its technology sector to ensure [that] the narrative of events'' globally is shaped by the U.S. and ''not by foreign adversaries,'' they explain, concluding that Google, Facebook, Twitter are ''increasingly integral to U.S. diplomatic and national security efforts.'' In other words, they see big-tech as a key weapon of the U.S. empire.
Mockingbird 2.0In the 1970s, the Church Committee unearthed the existence of Operation Mockingbird, a secret CIA project to infiltrate newsrooms across America and place agents masquerading as journalists inside. Investigative reporter Carl Bernstein's work found that the CIA had cultivated a network of over 400 individuals it considered assets, including the owner of The New York Times.
Today, it appears that the links between big media and big government are, if anything, closer than they were in the 1970s. The monopolistic power of big social media platforms gives them '' whether they like it or not '' extraordinary influence over public opinion. And within their opaque Silicon Valley offices, a small cadre of individuals set the algorithms and decide the moderation policies that shape what billions of us see every day. With a host of former officials taking positions in these companies, the U.S. national security state is acquiring some measure of influence over the means of communication. It's Operation Mockingbird for the 21st century '' and on a global scale.
It is not normal for NATO officials or CIA agents to suddenly be put in charge of TikTok content policy. This did not happen purely by accident, just as it did not occur by chance at the other big tech platforms. One might reasonably argue that some of the only people who have the skills to highlight, spot and counter disinformation campaigns are those who have done similar work in the military or secret services. However, these organizations are the last ones that many would want in control of big-tech platforms, given their history of subterfuge and deceit.
Put another way, if these were Russian-based social media companies filled to the brim with former FSB, KGB or Kremlin officials, we would immediately recognize them as blatant government-controlled platforms. Yet many of the most popular apps are heading in the same way.
There is certainly a huge problem with fake news and disinformation online. And a fair chunk of it emanates from Russia. But while some might argue that poachers can become gamekeepers and use their skills for good, this situation feels far more like foxes being in charge of the digital henhouse.
Feature photo | MintPress News
Alan MacLeod is Senior Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent, as well as a number of academic articles. He has also contributed to FAIR.org, The Guardian, Salon, The Grayzone, Jacobin Magazine, and Common Dreams.
Covid-19 Australia: 'Pandemic babies' with no immunity to viruses ending up in ICU | Daily Mail Online
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 12:44
A concerning number of 'pandemic babies' with no immunity to respiratory viruses are ending up seriously ill in ICU.
Doctors have revealed children born during the Covid-19 pandemic are requiring intensive care 'from encountering viruses they haven't come across before', such as influenza, RSV and Covid.
The children had been born and raised when there were virtually no other viruses circulating in Australia, other than Covid-19.
The Children's Hospital at Westmead infectious diseases paediatrician Dr Philip Britton said an analysis of ICU admissions across shows babies are testing positive for influenza and Covid at the same time.
'Over the last month or so, we have seen four times the admissions to hospital for flu in children as for Covid,' Dr Britton told The Daily Telegraph.
Infectious diseases paediatrician Dr Philip Britton said an analysis of ICU admissions across shows babies are testing positive for influenza and Covid at the same time
Dr Britton said five per cent of the children presenting with co-infections were being admitted to ICU, a statistic he described as 'very concerning'.
About half of the children had no pre-existing health conditions, with the elevated number of admissions putting pressure on the hospital system.
Some of the 'pandemic babies' are presenting with inflammation of the chest, brain and heart caused by influenza, Covid, and RSV.
RSV - respiratory syncytial virus - is a major cause of lung infections in children and can lead to pneumonia or bronchiolitis, which is particularly dangerous in young infants.
Severe cases can kill babies and toddlers, whose tiny airways have not yet fully formed and who struggle to cope with the infection.
'Among that group who are previously well '... It's not just a chest infection, some of these children can be impacted with the flu affecting the heart and the brain,' Dr Britton told The Daily Telegraph.
Some of the 'pandemic babies' are presenting with inflammation of the chest, brain and heart caused by influenza, Covid, and RSV.
A warning was sounded about RSV three weeks ago when there were just 355 cases a week in NSW, but three weeks later that has rocketed up to 3,775 in a week.
Around a fifth of those developed the potentially lethal bronchiolitis, with 40 per cent of them ending up in hospital.
Infectious disease researcher Dr John-Sebastian Eden said the triple whammy of RSV, flu and Covid was packing out the emergency department of Sydney's Westmead Children's Hospital.
'There is a widespread three-way outbreak occurring,' he told Daily Mail Australia.
International borders opening up has seen flu come back and new strains of RSV.
'With Covid layered up on top, these are three main viruses which will lead to hospitalisation.'
Potentially lethal respiratory syncytial virus which attacks kids and has no vaccine has exploded in NSW with cases increasing tenfold in just three weeks
During Covid, RSV continued to spread and split into two separate strains in the east and west of the country in the wake of Western Australia's prolonged isolation.
Infectious disease researcher Dr John-Sebastian Eden said the triple whammy of RSV, flu and Covid was packing out the emergency department of Sydney's Westmead Children's Hospital
Researchers were shocked by the sudden rise of the disease in the first year of lockdowns, fuelled by keeping childcare centres open despite Covid restrictions.
'It was something we had never seen before,' said Dr Eden. 'Even in lockdown there was a lot of effort to keep childcare open.
'You only need a small amount of virus to build up a chain of transmission.'
The disease subsided in 2021, but has now bounced back with the current outbreak.
Dr Eden believes cases in NSW have yet to reach their peak, but is now braced for the outbreak to spread nationwide.
He expects the disease to spread across the southern half of the country at similar levels in the coming weeks.
'What happens is where you have an outbreak in NSW and we've got all those people travelling to other states from there, it then feeds outbreaks in other parts,' he said.
The disease subsided in 2021, but has now bounced back with the current outbreak.
HERE'S WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT RSV RSV is normally a winter disease but Covid lockdowns saw an unexpected huge surge in summer cases last year.
Symptoms include a runny nose, cough, reduced feeding and fever. Complications include wheezing and difficulty breathing, which can develop into pneumonia.
RSV - respiratory syncytial virus - is a major cause of lung infections in children and can lead to pneumonia or bronchiolitis, which is particularly dangerous in young infants.
Like Covid, it can be transferred by sneezing and coughing, but unlike Covid, young children are particularly affected by it.
'Most children will recover without needing specialist care in hospital, and children with mild infection can be treated with rest at home,' paediatrician Daniel Yeoh wrote in The Conversation.
'It's the major cause of lung infections in children, commonly causing bronchiolitis.
'Severe cases occasionally lead to death, predominantly in very young infants.
Almost all children have had an RSV infection by the age of two, but infants in their first year of life are more likely to experience severe infections requiring hospitalisation, because their airways are smaller. Babies have also not built up immunity to RSV from previous years.
Dr Yeoh added: 'Treatment for RSV is focused on helping children with their breathing (for example, giving them oxygen) and feeding (for example, administering fluids through a drip).'
There is no vaccine for RSV but several are under development.
Pfizer and BioNTech Announce New Agreement with U.S. Government to Provide Additional Doses of COVID-19 Vaccine | Business Wire
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 12:41
NEW YORK & MAINZ, Germany--(BUSINESS WIRE )--Pfizer Inc. (NYSE: PFE) and BioNTech SE (Nasdaq: BNTX) today announced a new vaccine supply agreement with the U.S. government to support the continued fight against COVID-19. Under the agreement, the U.S. government will receive 105 million doses (30 µg, 10 µg and 3 µg). This may include adult Omicron-adapted COVID-19 vaccines, subject to authorization from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The doses are planned to be delivered as soon as late summer 2022 and continue into the fourth quarter of this year.
The U.S. government will pay the companies $3.2 billion upon receipt of the first 105 million doses. Under this agreement, the U.S. government also has the option to purchase up to 195 million additional doses, bringing the total number of potential doses to 300 million.
''As the virus evolves, this new agreement will help ensure people across the country have access to vaccines that may provide protection against current and future variants,'' said Albert Bourla, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Pfizer. ''Vaccines have been and will remain critical to protecting people of all ages against COVID-19. We remain proud of our long-term partnership with the U.S. government in helping to address this pandemic, and of the ongoing impact of vaccination efforts in the U.S. and around the world.''
''This agreement will provide additional doses for U.S. residents and help cope with the next COVID-19 wave. Pending regulatory authorization, it will also include an Omicron-adapted vaccine, which we believe is important to address the rapidly spreading Omicron variant,'' said Sean Marett, Chief Business and Chief Commercial Officer of BioNTech. ''We appreciate the continued partnership of the U.S. government in our shared goal to help end this pandemic.''
On June 25, 2022, Pfizer and BioNTech reported pivotal data demonstrating the safety, tolerability and immunogenicity of two Omicron-adapted vaccine candidates. These data have been shared with regulators, including the FDA, and a request for U.S. Emergency Use Authorization is planned. The companies have begun manufacturing the Omicron-adapted vaccine candidates at risk so that they can begin deliveries rapidly upon authorization or approval and subsequent recommendation by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC), if received, and as directed by the U.S. government. Eligible U.S. residents will continue to receive the vaccine for free, consistent with the U.S. government's commitment for free access to COVID-19 vaccines.
The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, which is based on BioNTech's proprietary mRNA technology, was developed by both BioNTech and Pfizer. BioNTech is the Marketing Authorization Holder in the United States, the European Union, the United Kingdom, Canada and other countries, and the holder of emergency use authorizations or equivalents in the United States (jointly with Pfizer) and other countries. Submissions to pursue regulatory approvals in those countries where emergency use authorizations or equivalent were initially granted are planned.
U.S. Indication & Authorized Use
Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is FDA authorized under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for active immunization to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in individuals 6 months of age and older.
Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is FDA authorized to provide:
Primary Series
a 3-dose primary series to individuals 6 months through 4 years of agea 2-dose primary series to individuals 5 years of age and oldera third primary series dose to individuals 5 years of age and older with certain kinds of immunocompromiseBooster Series
a single booster dose to individuals 5 through 11 years of age who have completed a primary series with Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccinea first booster dose to individuals 12 years of age and older who have completed a primary series with Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine or COMIRNATY® (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA)a first booster dose to individuals 18 years of age and older who have completed primary vaccination with a different authorized or approved COVID-19 vaccine. The booster schedule is based on the labeling information of the vaccine used for the primary seriesa second booster dose to individuals 50 years of age and older who have received a first booster dose of any authorized or approved COVID-19 vaccinea second booster dose to individuals 12 years of age and older with certain kinds of immunocompromise and who have received a first booster dose of any authorized or approved COVID-19 vaccineCOMIRNATY® INDICATIONCOMIRNATY® (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) is a vaccine approved for active immunization to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in individuals 16 years of age and older.
COMIRNATY® is administered as a 2-dose primary seriesCOMIRNATY® AUTHORIZED USESCOMIRNATY® (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) is FDA authorized under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to provide:
Primary Series
a 2-dose primary series to individuals 12 through 15 years of agea third primary series dose to individuals 12 years of age and older with certain kinds of immunocompromiseBooster Dose
a first booster dose to individuals 12 years of age and older who have completed a primary series with Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine or COMIRNATY®a first booster dose to individuals 18 years of age and older who have completed primary vaccination with another authorized or approved COVID-19 vaccine. The booster schedule is based on the labeling information of the vaccine used for the primary seriesa second booster dose to individuals 50 years of age and older who have received a first booster dose of any authorized or approved COVID-19 vaccinea second booster dose to individuals 12 years of age and older with certain kinds of immunocompromise and who have received a first booster dose of any authorized or approved COVID-19 vaccine Emergency Use Authorization Emergency uses of the vaccine have not been approved or licensed by FDA, but have been authorized by FDA, under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to prevent Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID 19) in individuals 6 months of age and older. The emergency uses are only authorized for the duration of the declaration that circumstances exist justifying the authorization of emergency use of the medical product under Section 564(b)(1) of the FD&C Act unless the declaration is terminated or authorization revoked sooner.
INTERCHANGEABILITY FDA-approved COMIRNATY® (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) and the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine FDA authorized for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for individuals 12 years of age and older can be used interchangeably by a vaccination provider when prepared according to their respective instructions for use.
The formulations of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine authorized for use in individuals 6 months through 4 years of age, 5 through 11 years of age, and 12 years of age and older are different and should therefore not be used interchangeably.
IMPORTANT SAFETY INFORMATION
Tell your vaccination provider about all the vaccine recipient's medical conditions, including if the vaccine recipient:
has any allergieshas had myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle) or pericarditis (inflammation of the lining outside the heart)has a feverhas bleeding disorder or is on a blood thinneris immunocompromised or is on a medicine that affects the immune systemis pregnant, plan to become pregnant, or are breastfeedinghas received another COVID-19 vaccinehas ever fainted in association with an injectionPfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine or COMIRNATY® (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) may not protect all vaccine recipients
The vaccine recipient should not receive Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine or COMIRNATY® (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) if the vaccine recipient had a severe allergic reaction to any of its ingredients or had a severe allergic reaction to a previous dose of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine or COMIRNATY®
There is a remote chance that Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine or COMIRNATY® (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) could cause a severe allergic reaction. A severe allergic reaction would usually occur within a few minutes to 1 hour after getting a dose of the vaccine. For this reason, your vaccination provider may ask the vaccine recipient to stay at the place where the vaccine was administered for monitoring after vaccination. If the vaccine recipient experiences a severe allergic reaction, call 9-1-1 or go to the nearest hospital
Seek medical attention right away if the vaccine recipient has any of the following symptoms: difficulty breathing, swelling of the face and throat, a fast heartbeat, a bad rash all over the body, dizziness, and weaknessMyocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle) and pericarditis (inflammation of the lining outside the heart) have occurred in some people who have received the vaccine, more commonly in adolescent males and adult males under 40 years of age than among females and older males. In most of these people, symptoms began within a few days following receipt of the second dose of the vaccine. The chance of having this occur is very low.
Seek medical attention right away if the vaccine recipient has any of the following symptoms after receiving the vaccine, particularly during the 2 weeks after receiving a vaccine dose:
Chest painShortness of breath or difficulty breathingFeelings of having a fast-beating, fluttering, or pounding heartFaintingUnusual and persistent irritabilityUnusual and persistent poor feedingUnusual and persistent fatigue or lack of energyPersistent vomitingPersistent pain in the abdomenUnusual and persistent cool, pale skinFainting can happen after getting injectable vaccines, including Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine or COMIRNATY® (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA). Sometimes people who faint can fall and hurt themselves. For this reason, your vaccination provider may ask the vaccine recipient to sit or lie down for 15 minutes after receiving the vaccine
Some people with weakened immune systems may have reduced immune responses to Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine or COMIRNATY® (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA)
Additional side effects include rash, itching, hives, swelling of the face, injection site pain, tiredness, feeling weak or lack of energy, headache, muscle pain, chills, joint pain, fever, injection site swelling, injection site redness, nausea, feeling unwell, swollen lymph nodes (lymphadenopathy), decreased appetite, diarrhea, vomiting, arm pain, fainting in association with injection of the vaccine, and irritability.
These may not be all the possible side effects of the vaccine. Call the vaccination provider or healthcare provider about bothersome side effects or side effects that do not go away.
You should always ask your healthcare providers for medical advice about adverse events. Report vaccine side effects to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). The VAERS toll-free number is 1'800'822'7967 or report online to www.vaers.hhs.gov/reportevent.html. You can also report side effects to Pfizer Inc. at www.pfizersafetyreporting.com or by calling 1-800-438-1985Click for Fact Sheets and Prescribing Information for individuals 6 months of age and older:
Recipients and Caregivers Fact Sheet (6 months through 4 years of age) Recipients and Caregivers Fact Sheet (5 through 11 years of age) Recipients and Caregivers Fact Sheet (12 years of age and older) COMIRNATY® Full Prescribing Information (16 years of age and older), DILUTE BEFORE USE, Purple Cap COMIRNATY® Full Prescribing Information (16 years of age and older), DO NOT DILUTE, Gray Cap EUA Fact Sheet for Vaccination Providers (6 months through 4 years of age), DILUTE BEFORE USE, Maroon Cap EUA Fact Sheet for Vaccination Providers (5 through 11 years of age), DILUTE BEFORE USE, Orange Cap EUA Fact Sheet for Vaccination Providers (12 years of age and older), DILUTE BEFORE USE, Purple Cap EUA Fact Sheet for Vaccination Providers (12 years of age and older), DO NOT DILUTE, Gray Cap
About Pfizer: Breakthroughs That Change Patients' LivesAt Pfizer, we apply science and our global resources to bring therapies to people that extend and significantly improve their lives. We strive to set the standard for quality, safety and value in the discovery, development and manufacture of health care products, including innovative medicines and vaccines. Every day, Pfizer colleagues work across developed and emerging markets to advance wellness, prevention, treatments and cures that challenge the most feared diseases of our time. Consistent with our responsibility as one of the world's premier innovative biopharmaceutical companies, we collaborate with health care providers, governments and local communities to support and expand access to reliable, affordable health care around the world. For more than 170 years, we have worked to make a difference for all who rely on us. We routinely post information that may be important to investors on our website at www.Pfizer.com. In addition, to learn more, please visit us on www.Pfizer.com and follow us on Twitter at @Pfizer and @Pfizer News, LinkedIn, YouTube and like us on Facebook at Facebook.com/Pfizer.
Pfizer Disclosure NoticeThe information contained in this release is as of June 29, 2022. Pfizer assumes no obligation to update forward-looking statements contained in this release as the result of new information or future events or developments.
This release contains forward-looking information about Pfizer's efforts to combat COVID-19, the collaboration between BioNTech and Pfizer to develop a COVID-19 vaccine, the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine program, and the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, also known as COMIRNATY (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) (BNT162b2) (including a supply agreement with the U.S. government and planned deliveries thereunder, two Omicron-adapted COVID-19 vaccine candidates (one monovalent and one bivalent), planned regulatory submissions, qualitative assessments of available data, potential benefits, expectations for clinical trials, potential regulatory submissions, the anticipated timing of data readouts, regulatory submissions, regulatory approvals or authorizations and anticipated manufacturing, distribution and supply) involving substantial risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such statements. Risks and uncertainties include, among other things, the uncertainties inherent in research and development, including the ability to meet anticipated clinical endpoints, commencement and/or completion dates for clinical trials, regulatory submission dates, regulatory approval dates and/or launch dates, as well as risks associated with preclinical and clinical data (including Phase 1/2/3 or Phase 4 data), including the data discussed in this release, for BNT162b2, any monovalent or bivalent vaccine candidates or any other vaccine candidate in the BNT162 program in any of our studies in pediatrics, adolescents, or adults or real world evidence, including the possibility of unfavorable new preclinical, clinical or safety data and further analyses of existing preclinical, clinical or safety data; the ability to produce comparable clinical or other results, including the rate of vaccine effectiveness and safety and tolerability profile observed to date, in additional analyses of the Phase 3 trial and additional studies, in real world data studies or in larger, more diverse populations following commercialization; the ability of BNT162b2, any monovalent or bivalent vaccine candidates or any future vaccine to prevent COVID-19 caused by emerging virus variants; the risk that more widespread use of the vaccine will lead to new information about efficacy, safety, or other developments, including the risk of additional adverse reactions, some of which may be serious; the risk that preclinical and clinical trial data are subject to differing interpretations and assessments, including during the peer review/publication process, in the scientific community generally, and by regulatory authorities; whether and when additional data from the BNT162 mRNA vaccine program will be published in scientific journal publications and, if so, when and with what modifications and interpretations; whether regulatory authorities will be satisfied with the design of and results from these and any future preclinical and clinical studies; whether and when submissions to request emergency use or conditional marketing authorizations for BNT162b2 in additional populations, for a potential booster dose for BNT162b2, any monovalent or bivalent vaccine candidates or any potential future vaccines (including potential future annual boosters or re-vaccination), and/or other biologics license and/or emergency use authorization applications or amendments to any such applications may be filed in particular jurisdictions for BNT162b2, any monovalent or bivalent vaccine candidates or any other potential vaccines that may arise from the BNT162 program, including a potential variant-based, higher dose, or bivalent vaccine, and if obtained, whether or when such emergency use authorizations or licenses will expire or terminate; whether and when any applications that may be pending or filed for BNT162b2 (including any requested amendments to the emergency use or conditional marketing authorizations), any monovalent or bivalent vaccine candidates, or other vaccines that may result from the BNT162 program may be approved by particular regulatory authorities, which will depend on myriad factors, including making a determination as to whether the vaccine's benefits outweigh its known risks and determination of the vaccine's efficacy and, if approved, whether it will be commercially successful; decisions by regulatory authorities impacting labeling or marketing, manufacturing processes, safety and/or other matters that could affect the availability or commercial potential of a vaccine, including development of products or therapies by other companies; disruptions in the relationships between us and our collaboration partners, clinical trial sites or third-party suppliers; the risk that demand for any products may be reduced or no longer exist which may lead to reduced revenues or excess inventory; risks related to the availability of raw materials to manufacture a vaccine; challenges related to our vaccine's formulation, dosing schedule and attendant storage, distribution and administration requirements, including risks related to storage and handling after delivery by Pfizer; the risk that we may not be able to successfully develop other vaccine formulations, booster doses or potential future annual boosters or re-vaccinations or new variant-based vaccines; the risk that we may not be able to maintain or scale up manufacturing capacity on a timely basis or maintain access to logistics or supply channels commensurate with global demand for our vaccine, which would negatively impact our ability to supply the estimated numbers of doses of our vaccine within the projected time periods as previously indicated; whether and when additional supply agreements will be reached; uncertainties regarding the ability to obtain recommendations from vaccine advisory or technical committees and other public health authorities and uncertainties regarding the commercial impact of any such recommendations; challenges related to public vaccine confidence or awareness; uncertainties regarding the impact of COVID-19 on Pfizer's business, operations and financial results; and competitive developments.
A further description of risks and uncertainties can be found in Pfizer's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021 and in its subsequent reports on Form 10-Q, including in the sections thereof captioned ''Risk Factors'' and ''Forward-Looking Information and Factors That May Affect Future Results'', as well as in its subsequent reports on Form 8-K, all of which are filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and available at www.sec.gov and www.pfizer.com.
About BioNTechBiopharmaceutical New Technologies is a next generation immunotherapy company pioneering novel therapies for cancer and other serious diseases. The Company exploits a wide array of computational discovery and therapeutic drug platforms for the rapid development of novel biopharmaceuticals. Its broad portfolio of oncology product candidates includes individualized and off-the-shelf mRNA-based therapies, innovative chimeric antigen receptor T cells, bi-specific checkpoint immuno-modulators, targeted cancer antibodies and small molecules. Based on its deep expertise in mRNA vaccine development and in-house manufacturing capabilities, BioNTech and its collaborators are developing multiple mRNA vaccine candidates for a range of infectious diseases alongside its diverse oncology pipeline. BioNTech has established a broad set of relationships with multiple global pharmaceutical collaborators, including Genmab, Sanofi, Genentech, a member of the Roche Group, Regeneron, Genevant, Fosun Pharma, and Pfizer. For more information, please visit www.BioNTech.de.
BioNTech Forward-looking StatementsThis press release contains ''forward-looking statements'' of BioNTech within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements may include, but may not be limited to, statements concerning: BioNTech's efforts to combat COVID-19; the collaboration between BioNTech and Pfizer including the program to develop a COVID-19 vaccine and COMIRNATY (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) (BNT162b2) (including a supply agreement with the U.S. government and planned deliveries thereunder, two Omicron-adapted COVID-19 vaccine candidates (one monovalent and one bivalent), planned regulatory submissions, qualitative assessments of available data, potential benefits, expectations for clinical trials, the anticipated timing of regulatory submissions, regulatory approvals or authorizations and anticipated manufacturing, distribution and supply); our expectations regarding the potential characteristics of BNT162b2, any monovalent or bivalent vaccine candidates or any future vaccine, in our clinical trials and/or in commercial use based on data observations to date; the ability of BNT162b2, any monovalent or bivalent vaccine candidates or any future vaccine, to prevent COVID-19 caused by emerging virus variants; the uncertainties inherent in research and development, including the ability to meet anticipated clinical endpoints, commencement and/or completion dates for clinical trials, regulatory submission dates, regulatory approval dates and/or launch dates, as well as risks associated with preclinical and clinical data (including Phase 1/2/3 or Phase 4 data), including the data previously published for BNT162b2, any monovalent or bivalent vaccine candidates, or any other vaccine candidate in BNT162 program in any of our studies in pediatrics, adolescents, or adults or real world evidence, including the possibility of unfavorable new preclinical, clinical or safety data and further analyses of existing preclinical, clinical or safety data; the expected time point for additional readouts on efficacy data of BNT162b2, any monovalent or bivalent vaccine candidates or any future vaccine, in our clinical trials; the nature of the clinical data, which is subject to ongoing peer review, regulatory review and market interpretation; that more widespread use of the vaccine will lead to new information about efficacy, safety, or other developments, including the risk of additional adverse reactions, some of which may be serious; whether and when submissions to request emergency use or conditional marketing authorizations for BNT162b2 in additional populations, for a potential booster dose for BNT162b2, any monovalent or bivalent vaccine candidates or any potential future vaccines (including potential future annual boosters or re-vaccination), and/or other biologics license and/or emergency use authorization applications or amendments to any such applications may be filed in particular jurisdictions for BNT162b2, any monovalent or bivalent vaccine candidates or any other potential vaccines that may arise from the BNT162 program, including a potential variant-based, higher dose, or bivalent vaccine, and if obtained, whether or when such emergency use authorizations or licenses will expire or terminate; the timing for submission of data for, or receipt of, any marketing approval or Emergency Use Authorization; our contemplated shipping and storage plan, including our estimated product shelf life at various temperatures; the ability of BioNTech to supply the quantities of BNT162, any monovalent or bivalent vaccine candidates or any future vaccine, to support clinical development and market demand, including our production estimates for 2022; disruptions in the relationships between us and our collaboration partners, clinical trial sites or third-party suppliers; reduction in the demand for any products, which may lead to reduced revenues or excess inventory; the availability of raw materials to manufacture a vaccine; our vaccine's formulation, dosing schedule and attendant storage, distribution and administration requirements, including risks related to storage and handling after delivery by BioNTech; our ability to successfully develop other vaccine formulations, booster doses or potential future annual boosters or re-vaccinations or new variant-based vaccines; our ability to maintain or scale up manufacturing capacity on a timely basis or maintain access to logistics or supply channels commensurate with global demand for our vaccine, which would negatively impact our ability to supply the estimated numbers of doses of our vaccine within the projected time periods as previously indicated; whether and when additional supply agreements will be reached; our ability to obtain recommendations from vaccine advisory or technical committees and other public health authorities and uncertainties regarding the commercial impact of any such recommendations; challenges related to public vaccine confidence or awareness; and uncertainties regarding the impact of COVID-19 on BioNTech's trials, business and general operations. Any forward-looking statements in this press release are based on BioNTech current expectations and beliefs of future events, and are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially and adversely from those set forth in or implied by such forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to: the ability to meet the pre-defined endpoints in clinical trials; competition to create a vaccine for COVID-19; the ability to produce comparable clinical or other results, including our stated rate of vaccine effectiveness and safety and tolerability profile observed to date, in the remainder of the trial or in larger, more diverse populations upon commercialization; the ability to effectively scale our productions capabilities; and other potential difficulties.
For a discussion of these and other risks and uncertainties, see BioNTech's Annual Report as Form 20-F for the Year Ended December 31, 2021, filed with the SEC on March 30, 2022, which is available on the SEC's website at www.sec.gov. All information in this press release is as of the date of the release, and BioNTech undertakes no duty to update this information unless required by law.
Category: Vaccines
Stock futures fall 1.5% as S&P 500 tracks for worst first half of the year since 1970
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 12:31
U.S. stock index futures declined early on Thursday morning, as the S&P 500 prepares to wrap its worst first half in decades.
Futures contracts tied to the Dow Jones Industrial Average shed 363 points, or 1.2%. S&P 500 futures slipped 1.5%, and Nasdaq 100 futures pulled back by 1.7%.
Healthcare stocks pulled the market lower Thursday after Universal Health Services issued second quarter earnings and revenue guidance below expectations, citing lower patient volumes. Shares fell almost 6% in the premarket. Centene, Abiomed and PerkinElmer also lost about 5% each.
Home furnishings chain RH saw shares drop about 9% after it issued a profit warning for the full year. Other home retailers Wayfair and Williams-Sonoma followed them lower, losing more than 4% each.
"The combination of slowing growth, fading EPS prospects, and ongoing monetary tightening has been weighing on equity sentiment for months and is causing consternation again this morning," wrote Adam Crisafulli of Vital Knowledge.
The Dow and S&P 500 are on track for their worst three-month period since the first quarter of 2020 when Covid lockdowns sent stocks tumbling. The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite is down more than 20% over the last three months, its worst stretch since 2008.
The S&P 500 is also on track for its worst first half of the year since 1970, which has been dominated by myriad factors pressuring markets. Those include surging inflation, Federal Reserve rate hikes, Russia's ongoing war on Ukraine and Covid-19 lockdowns in China '' all of which have helped fuel fears of a coming global recession.
A surge in bond yields earlier in the year and historically pricey equity valuations sent tech stocks tumbling first, as investors rotated out of growth-oriented areas of the market. Rising rates makes future profits '-- like those promised by growth companies '-- less attractive.
The tech-heavy Nasdaq has been hit especially hard this year. The index is now more than 30% below its Nov. 22 all-time high. Some of the largest technology companies have registered sizeable declines this year, with Netflix down 70%. Apple and Alphabet have each lost roughly 22%, while Facebook-parent Meta has slid 51%.
Investors are also looking ahead to the release of new inflation data, with the core personal consumption expenditures index set to come out at 8:30 a.m. ET. That's the Federal Reserve's preferred measure of inflation, and it's expected to show a year-over-year increase of 4.8% for May, according to Dow Jones.
Stock picks and investing trends from CNBC Pro:The Federal Reserve has taken aggressive action to try and bring down rampant inflation, which has surged to a 40-year high.
Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland President Loretta Mester told CNBC that she supports a 75 basis point hike at the central bank's upcoming July meeting if current economic conditions persist. Earlier in June, the Fed raised its benchmark interest rate by three-quarters of a percentage point, which was the largest increase since 1994.
Some Wall Street watchers are worried that too-aggressive action will tip the economy into a recession.
"We do not believe the stock market has bottomed yet and we see further downside ahead. Investors should be holding elevated levels of cash right now," said George Ball, chairman of Sanders Morris Harris.
"We see the S&P 500 bottoming at around 3,100, as the Federal Reserve's aggressive, but necessary inflation-fighting measures are likely to depress corporate earnings and push stocks lower," he added.
On Wednesday the Dow advanced 0.27% for its first positive day in three. The S&P 500 and Nasdaq Composite both posted a third straight negative day, declining 0.07% and 0.03%, respectively.
On the economic data front, weekly jobless claims will be in focus Thursday. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones are expecting 230,000 first-time filers. Personal income and spending data will also be released.
WHO Recommends New Gates-Funded Polio Vaccine to Address Vaccine-Derived Polio Outbreak in U.K. ' Children's Health Defense
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 12:30
Miss a day, miss a lot. Subscribe to The Defender's Top News of the Day. It's free.
Health officials in the U.K. this month identified the country's first polio outbreak in 40 years, and believe the outbreak was caused by a strain of polio found in the oral polio vaccine.
Health officials in Britain warned parents on June 22 to ensure their children have been vaccinated against polio after multiple closely related versions of the virus that cause the disease were found in sewage water at the London Beckton Sewage Treatment Works '-- the largest water treatment plant in the U.K.
''The Global Polio Laboratory Network has confirmed the isolation of type 2 vaccine-derived poliovirus (VDPV2) from environmental samples in London, United Kingdom, which were detected as part of ongoing disease surveillance,'' the World Health Organization (WHO) states on its website.
The U.K. Health Security Agency (UKHSA) said it believes the virus was ''vaccine-derived,'' meaning it came from someone who received the live polio vaccine. That person then passed the virus to individuals in London, who shed the virus into their feces.
The viruses' genetic sequences suggest ''there has been some spread between closely linked individuals in north and east London,'' the UKHSA said.
The virus was isolated from environmental samples collected between February and May, and no related cases of paralysis have been detected, the WHO said. ''Additional sewage samples collected upstream from the main waste-water treatment plant's inlet are being analyzed.''
People vaccinated with the live oral polio vaccine (OPV) shed traces of the virus in their stool '-- which eventually end up in sewage wastewater, NPR reported. Scientists believe a person brought the virus into London and then spread it to others who were unvaccinated.
''We are urgently investigating to better understand the extent of this transmission,'' Vanessa Saliba, an epidemiologist who consults for the UKHSA, said in the statement.
The risk to the general public is thought to be ''extremely low'' but the agency encourages anyone not fully vaccinated to receive a polio vaccine.
WHO approves Gates' oral polio vaccine for emergency use
The WHO on Nov. 13, 2020, granted Emergency Use Listing (EUL) to a new novel oral polio vaccine called nOPV2, designed to treat the type of polio outbreak occurring in the U.K.
Based on the WHO's review of data and research available on nOPV2, the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE) recommended Gates' nOPV2 become the ''vaccine of choice'' for responding to type 2 polio outbreaks caused by OPV.
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation provided 100% of the funding for the development and clinical trials of the vaccine.
The Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) states on its website:
''The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has funded all development and clinical trials of nOPV2 to date, working closely with GPEI partners throughout the process to ensure resources are going toward a tool that could prove critical to helping end all forms of polio.
''Based on promising data from clinical trials, and the public health emergency that cVDPV2 [vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2] constitutes, the Foundation is funding at-risk production of 160 million doses of nOPV2 to ensure it can be deployed immediately following the issuance of WHO's interim Emergency Use Listing (EUL) recommendation for use.''
''The emergency use listing, or EUL, is the first of its kind for a vaccine'' designed to ''pave the way for potential listing of COVID-19 vaccines,'' the WHO said on its website.
On December 31, 2020, the WHO issued its first EUL listing for a COVID-19 vaccine. According to the WHO, the agency granted the listing for the Pfizer Comirnaty vaccine.
The EUL is a regulatory pathway that allows the WHO '-- whose second-largest financial donor is the Gates Foundation '-- to distribute an unlicensed product for a ''Public Health Emergency of International Concern,'' which the organization claims polio has been since 2014.
The EUL allows vaccines and medicines to be made available more quickly to address health emergencies, without long-term phase 3 data, and is the same mechanism used for distribution of Zika, Ebola and COVID-19 vaccines.
According to the WHO, in ''very rare cases,'' the administration of OPV results in vaccine-associated paralytic polio associated with a ''reversion of the vaccine strains to the more neurovirulent profile of wild poliovirus.''
In addition to causing vaccine-associated paralytic polio, vaccine strains have the capacity to cause disease of the nervous system and to transmit from person to person resulting in infectious poliomyelitis.
Based on the WHO's review of data and research available on nOPV2, the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE) recommended Gates' nOPV2 become the ''vaccine of choice'' for responding to type 2 polio outbreaks caused by OPV.
According to the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI), the nOPV2 was developed to address vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2 outbreaks, which ''can emerge when the weakened strain of the vaccine virus circulates in under-immunized populations and, with time, can genetically revert into a form that causes paralysis.''
In other words, ''under-immunized'' populations '-- not the OPV '-- are to blame for the vaccine-related polio strains.
In an email to The Defender, Dr. Brian Hooker, Ph.D., P.E., Children's Health Defense chief scientific officer and professor of biology at Simpson University said:
''Once again, Big Pharma, fueled by the Gates Foundation, has created a huge problem that only they can solve. The introduction of the new OPV in the U.K. has predictably led to polio virus in the sewage (i.e., where poliovirus propagates) and now the ''only solution'' is to inject U.K. citizens with the nPOV2 to prevent the spread of OPV-induced polio. If this isn't a scam, I don't know what is!''
The U.K.'s Medicines and Regulatory Health Products Agency (MHRA) on June 17 said in a tweet: ''An exciting new global study, co-authored by our lead scientist Javier Martin, shows that new polio vaccine nOPV2 is an effective tool in reducing the risk of Vaccine-Derived Polio Viruses. ''
An exciting new global study, co-authored by our lead scientist Javier Martin, shows that new polio vaccine nOPV2 is an effective tool in reducing the risk of Vaccine-Derived Polio Viruses. https://t.co/C7WEXc91WN#polio #poliovaccine #polioeradication pic.twitter.com/P8YISydi34
'-- MHRAgovuk (@MHRAgovuk) June 17, 2022
The tweet linked to a study published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) advocating for the use of Gates' nOPV2 vaccine.
Between the launch of nOPV2 in March 2021 and late May 2022, more than 350 million doses had been administered across 18 countries.
The GPEI confirmed, as of May 30, 16 other countries are ''ready to use nOPV2'' and an additional 17 are in the midst of preparations.
WHO, GPEI and other organizations pushing Gates-funded vaccine
According to UNICEF, the GPEI is a public-private partnership led by national governments with six core partners: Rotary International, the WHO, the CDC, UNICEF, the Gates Foundation and Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance.
The Gates Foundation, in addition to funding the nPOV2 vaccine, GPEI and the WHO, also funds Rotary International, UNICEF, Gavi and the CDC Foundation.
The entity in charge of monitoring vaccine adverse events following administraton of nPOV2 is the WHO's own Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety (GACVS).
''The GACVS Sub-Committee on nOPV2 Safety will advise WHO and its Member States on safety outcomes following the use of initially pre-licensed type 2 novel oral poliovirus vaccine, during the EUL period, prior to the availability of Phase III clinical trial results,'' according to GPEI.
In essence, the Gates Foundation funded the creation, development and clinical trials for the new nPOV2 polio vaccine, funds the organizations that administered millions of doses to be given under EUL without any long-term data, funds the organizations implementing its roll-out and surveillance and funds the entity monitoring adverse events associated with nPOV2's use.
The Gates Foundation is also a funder of NPR and NPR's blog, which have published numerous articles on VDPV2 and paved the way for Gates' nPOV2 vaccine as the solution.
Oral polio v. inactivated polio vaccines
According to the WHO, the original OPV uses a mixture of ''live attenuated poliovirus strains of each of the three serotypes,'' selected for their ability to mimic the immune system's response following infection with wild polioviruses, but with a reduced chance of spreading to the central nervous system.
To achieve the desired immune response, three or more doses of OPV are required spaced out over a period of time.
The U.S. and some western countries use an inactivated (killed) polio vaccine (IPV) developed by Dr. Jonas Salk and first used in 1955.
Scientists claim the inactivated virus poses no risk of spread, although the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting system shows two reported cases of poliomyelitis reported following vaccination with IPV.
The U.S. stopped using OPV in 2000 because it caused paralytic polio.
According to NPR, countries in Africa, the Middle East and parts of Asia are experiencing a rise in cases of vaccine-derived polio. These countries mostly use the OPV developed by Albert Sabin and first used in 1961.
Gates' nOPV2 vaccine is a modified version of Sabin's existing OPV vaccine.
''The spread of vaccine-derived polio virus from OPV vaccine in multiple countries throughout Africa and Asia resulted in 1,612 cases of paralytic polio from 2017 through 2020,'' Dr. Liz Mumper, pediatrician and former medical director of the Autism Research Institute told The Defender.
''Since these polio virus samples are in wastewater in a developed country, those who have access to clean water should not be at risk,'' Mumper said. ''However, the media is raising alarms. This is a setback for the Global Polio Eradication Initiative.''
According to the CDC, three cases of paralytic polio caused by the OPV vaccine have been reported in the U.S. since the vaccine was discontinued in 2000.
The CDC's Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, or VAERS, shows 66 reports of polio following administration of the OPV.
VAERS also shows 14 reported cases of poliomyelitis following vaccination with IPV. Historically, VAERS has been shown to report only 1% of actual vaccine adverse events.
Why Biden Shouldn't Run in 2024 - The Atlantic
Thu, 30 Jun 2022 04:29
Let me put this bluntly: Joe Biden should not run for reelection in 2024. He is too old.
Biden will turn 80 on November 20. He will be 82 if and when he begins a second term. The numbers just keep getting more ridiculous from there. ''It's not the 82 that's the problem. It's the 86,'' one swing voter said in a recent focus group, referring to the hypothetical age Biden would be at the end of that (very) hypothetical second term.
In recent weeks, I've spoken with 10 official and unofficial advisers to the administration who have spent time around the president during these deranged and divided days in America. ''What has this been like for him?'' is what I've been asking them, essentially. ''How is he holding up?''
They say, for the most part, that Biden is coping fine. You know, despite the 8.6 percent inflation, his depressed approval numbers, his vice president's worse approval numbers, the looming wipeout in the midterms, and all the other delights attending to Biden as he awaits the big, round-numbered birthday he has coming up in a few months. But here's another recurring theme I keep hearing, notably from people predisposed to liking the president. ''He just seems old,'' one senior administration official told me at a social function a few weeks ago.
There is nothing like the U.S. presidency to accelerate the aging process. This has been well documented, usually in those side-by-side photos of spry incoming presidents seen next to dramatically older-looking versions of themselves upon departure. Yet Biden keeps insisting that he will run again. The White House reaffirmed as much on Monday night via a tweet from the president's press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre. ''To be clear, as the President has said repeatedly, he plans to run in 2024,'' she wrote. It was an instant classic in the genre of political statements that raise far more questions than the one they were supposedly meant to answer.
Luckily, the message came equipped with everyone's favorite political qualifier'--''plans to.'' Plans, after all, can change. In this case, the sooner the better.
Stepping aside would permit Biden to shed the demands of being a disciplined candidate (never his strong suit). It would be immediately liberating, allowing the president to focus on what he's extremely well suited to: being a familiar mensch and champion and consoler to a country in dire need of one. He could off-load all of the burdens and suspicions that come with electoral ambitions. Nothing buys goodwill for a politician like self-removal from consideration.
The age issue will only get worse if Biden runs again. The ''whispers'' are becoming shouts. It has become thoroughly exhausting'--for Biden and his party and, to some extent, the country itself. But the question quiets considerably when no one's calculating how old a president born during Franklin D. Roosevelt's administration will be in 2028.
It all feels impolite to point this out'--disrespectful, ageist, and taboo, especially given the gross Republican smears about Biden being a doddering and demented old puppet. No one wants to perpetuate this garbage. In fact, people who have had regular contact with Biden describe him as engaged with the day-to-day aspects of his job and generally sharp on details. He will sometimes mangle sentences, blank on names, get tortured by teleprompters, lose his train of thought, or not make sense'--which is not so abnormal for someone his age.
Biden is by no means the more eloquent character he was in his younger days. It can be painful to watch him give prepared speeches. His tone can be tentative, and certain sentences can become hopscotching journeys. His aides in the room look visibly nervous at times. Biden worked to overcome a stutter during his youth, and in general it can become more difficult for stutterers to conceal these effects as they age.
Read: What Joe Biden can't bring himself to say
Otherwise, Biden deals with a fairly standard array of old-guy ailments. He has a spinal arthritis condition that his physician said might contribute to the ''perceptibly stiffer'' gait he has been observed with in recent years. He takes an anticoagulant and a cholesterol pill. He had a polyp removed from his colon last year, suffers from occasional bouts of acid reflux, and once had minor surgery to treat an enlarged prostate (you're welcome).
Geriatricians are always emphasizing that the effects of aging vary widely from person to person. By every indication, Biden appears to be among the lucky ones. His doctors cite no major health concerns. He takes care of himself. He does not drink or smoke, is not overweight, and works out at least five times a week. He looks great for a guy his age. Biden is fit to faithfully execute his duties, the White House physician said in his most recent health summary.
The question is: Should he? The answer: Sure, for now. But not a day after January 20, 2025.
As a point of professional comparison, Biden would be enjoying his 15th year of retirement if he had spent his career as a commercial airline pilot, or his 24th year if he had been an air-traffic controller. There's a reason the FAA mandates compulsory departure times for these positions (65 for pilots, 56 for controllers). These are life-and-death tasks that demand peak stamina and mental acuity. The pressure can be crushing, burnout is rampant, and no one wants to see grandpop in the damn cockpit.
A majority of Americans say they would favor a maximum age for their elected officials too. Of those Americans, about two-thirds think the limit should be 70 or younger. This would send nearly 30 percent of the United States Senate out to pasture. I would call this a good start, as hard as it might be to imagine someone other than Dianne Feinstein or Chuck Grassley charting out our kids' futures.
The ''concerns about Biden's age'' matter received a fibrous super-boost on Sunday when The New York Times published a front-page report that was based on conversations with nearly 50 Democratic officials across the country. Almost everyone interviewed expressed ''deep concern'' about the elderly state of the man in the chair. Biden's advanced age was presented as a kind of proxy for the tired and hobbled state of his agenda and the Democratic Party. To see the sentiment presented so universally among prominent Democrats was rather jarring.
Tom Nichols: Leave Joe Biden alone
''The presidency is a monstrously taxing job and the stark reality is the president would be closer to 90 than 80 at the end of a second term,'' David Axelrod, the chief strategist for Barack Obama, told the Times, putting a finer, fun-with-numbers point on the story.
The broader subtext of the Times article'--and, in a sense, every article about Biden's age'--is that the matchup between America's current condition and the doctor on call feels untenable.
This was not true in 2020. Biden said he was running for president'--for the third time'--because he viewed the prospect of Donald Trump's reelection as an existential threat to the nation. Poll after poll revealed that ''electability'' was the most important quality that Democrats were seeking in a 2020 nominee. Biden scared the fewest people. They mostly just wanted someone who could get rid of Trump. Someone who could come into office, not tweet like a madman, not propose bleach as a COVID treatment, not impugn the reputations of war heroes, civil-rights icons, and disabled reporters. Someone who could just be decent and serious and leave America in relative peace for a little while.
And Biden did this. He performed the most vital service of his presidency before it even began, on November 3, 2020. He showed up on January 20, 2021, and swore his oath in front of 25,000 National Guard troops charged with protecting Washington from his predecessor's most fervent supporters'--kind of a yikes moment for our democracy, you might recall. Officials I've spoken with who were on the inauguration stage that day say the overwhelming sentiment was one of relief; people were milling about thanking one another for their various roles in helping along this exceedingly precarious transition.
Theoretically, the rest could have been gravy for Biden after that. Or, alternatively, a procession of headaches and crises before a more and more hostile audience.
''What a terrible job you have,'' Jimmy Kimmel told Biden last week, when the president stopped by the late-night set for one of those feel-good presidential sit-downs. ''I'm glad you're doing it, but boy, oh boy, does this seem like a bad gig.'' Biden kept insisting that he's never been more optimistic about the country's future, but he sure sounded like his heart was not in this. Kimmel became briefly exasperated.
''Why are you so optimistic?'' the host interjected. ''It makes no sense!''
The audience laughed. They had a point.
''This generation is going to change everything,'' Biden went on. He meant young people'--the same cohort whose support for Biden has eroded markedly in recent polling. This would have made a perfect segue for Biden to announce that he was stepping aside and allowing the ever-restless, too-long-waiting ''next generation'' of Democrats to finally inherit the whirlwind. Alas, he did not.
Read: The Democrats' midterm identity crisis
Probably the main rationale for Biden to re-up in 2024 is the argument that he is the candidate best suited to beating Trump if he runs again. Biden has done it before. His age would be less of a factor against his predecessor, who turned 76 on Tuesday.
But for all the trauma that Trump inflicted on the country during his term, he appears to have kept the devotion of his base voters. Trump has even edged Biden by a few points in a recent batch of way-too-early rematch polls. Swing voters, independents, and Republicans who voted for Biden in 2020 are among the most unenthusiastic to the idea of his running again, says Sarah Longwell, the Republican political operative who hosts the podcast The Focus Group for The Bulwark. They mainly cite his age, she adds. And Republican voters give every indication of being far more motivated right now than Democrats, many of whom are sounding alarmingly demoralized. It hurts to even imagine what another Biden-Trump race could look like.
The other rationale for Biden to run would be the gnawing riddle of: If not him, then who? ''Don't compare me to the almighty. Compare me to the alternative,'' Biden used to say during the 2020 campaign. Four more years of Trump proved a sufficiently appalling ''alternative'' to land Biden in the White House in 2020, but it would be nice if Democrats had an obvious alternative to step in for the guy whom only 29 percent of Americans and 48 percent of Democrats want to see run again in 2024. Vice President Kamala Harris has not exactly asserted herself as the clamored-for heir apparent.
At the very least, Biden not running would unleash a profusion of youth and energy into the Democratic field. The non-AARP-card-carrying likes of Pete Buttigieg or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez or Chris Murphy or whoever it is could stand silently on the soapbox of the Iowa State Fair for five hours, and it would still feel like a refreshing change. They could commence with the Democrats' long-overdue debate about their next leaders and best ideas. It would send a message of a party not afraid of its future, and provide a contrast with an opposing party cemented in its terrifying past'--with its same terrifying frontman.
Aside from reinvigorating the Democrats, Biden could instantly burnish his own legacy by opting out of 2024. He would be praised for knowing when to step aside, for putting the interests of his party and country before himself, and for selflessly turning things over to the next acts. Gratitude would flow, maybe even from some of the Republicans he talked about doing business with. Everyone loves an elder statesman. A historic credit would be due to Joe Biden.
He spared the country from more Trump in 2020. He stepped in, calmed the thing down, and God love ya for that, Joey. He should be thanked up and down the Rehoboth boardwalk, ice-cream cone in hand, sooner rather than later.
Jack Segelstein contributed research to this article.
2008 California Proposition 8 - Wikipedia
Wed, 29 Jun 2022 19:41
Ballot proposition and state constitutional amendment passed in November 2008
Proposition 8ResponseVotes% Yes7,001,084 52.24% No6,401,482 47.76%Valid votes13,402,566 97.52%Invalid or blank votes340,611 2.48%Total votes13,743,177100.00% Registered voters/turnout 17,304,428 79.42%For
70%''80%
60%''70%
50%''60%
Against
70%''80%
60%''70%
50%''60%
Source: California Secretary of State[1]Proposition 8, known informally as Prop 8, was a California ballot proposition and a state constitutional amendment intended to ban same-sex marriage; it passed in the November 2008 California state elections and was later overturned in court. The proposition was created by opponents of same-sex marriage in advance[2] of the California Supreme Court's May 2008 appeal ruling, In re Marriage Cases, which followed the short-lived 2004 same-sex weddings controversy and found the previous ban on same-sex marriage (Proposition 22, 2000) unconstitutional. Proposition 8 was ultimately ruled unconstitutional by a federal court (on different grounds) in 2010, although the court decision did not go into effect until June 26, 2013, following the conclusion of proponents' appeals.
Proposition 8 countermanded the 2008 ruling by adding the same provision as in Proposition 22 to the California Constitution, providing that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California", thereby superseding the 2008 ruling.[3][4][5] As an amendment, it was ruled constitutional by the California Supreme Court in Strauss v. Horton, in 2009, on the grounds that it "carved out a limited [or 'narrow'] exception to the state equal protection clause"; in his dissent, Justice Carlos R. Moreno wrote that exceptions to the equal protection clause could not be made by any majority since its whole purpose was to protect minorities against the will of a majority.
Legal challenges to Proposition 8 were presented by opponents quickly after its approval. Following affirmation by the state courts, two same-sex couples filed a lawsuit against the initiative in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in the case Perry v. Schwarzenegger (later Hollingsworth v. Perry). In August 2010, Chief Judge Vaughn Walker ruled that the amendment was unconstitutional under both the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment,[6] since it purported to re-remove rights from a disfavored class only, with no rational basis. The official proponents' justifications for the measure were analyzed in over fifty pages covering eighty findings of fact. The state government supported the ruling and refused to defend the law.[7] The ruling was stayed pending appeal by the proponents of the initiative. On February 7, 2012, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2''1 decision, reached the same conclusion as the district court, but on narrower grounds. The court ruled that it was unconstitutional for California to grant marriage rights to same-sex couples, only to take them away shortly after. The ruling was stayed pending appeal to the United States Supreme Court.[8]
On June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision on the appeal in the case Hollingsworth v. Perry, ruling that proponents of initiatives such as Proposition 8 did not possess legal standing in their own right to defend the resulting law in federal court, either to the Supreme Court or (previously) to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Therefore, the Supreme Court vacated the decision of the Ninth Circuit, and remanded the case for further proceedings. The decision left the district court's 2010 ruling intact.[9][10][11] On June 28, 2013, the Ninth Circuit, on remand, dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and dissolved their previous stay of the district court's ruling, enabling Governor Jerry Brown to order same-sex marriages to resume.[12]
The passage of Proposition 8 received widespread media coverage over the amendment's effect on the concurrent 2008 presidential and congressional elections, as well as the pre-election effects Proposition 8 had on California's reputation as a historically LGBT-friendly state and the same-sex marriage debate that had started after same-sex marriage was legalized in Massachusetts through a 2004 court decision. After the results were certified and same-sex marriages ceased, supporters of the initiative were targeted by opponents with actions ranging from some opponents publicly shaming supporters by disclosing their names and addresses online and boycotting proponents' businesses and employers to others threatening supporters with murder and vandalizing their homes and property.
Overview In 2000, the State of California adopted Proposition 22 which, as an ordinary statute, forbade recognition or licensing of same-sex marriages in the state. During February and March 2004, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom directed the licensing of same-sex marriages on the basis of the state's equal protection clause, prompted also by recent events including George W. Bush's proposed constitutional ban, a possible legal case by Campaign for California Families (CCF), and a Supreme Court of Massachusetts ruling deeming same-sex marriage bans unconstitutional and permitting them from May 2004. While only lasting a month before being overruled, this was supported by other cities such as San Jose,[13] gained global attention, and led to the case In re Marriage Cases, in which Proposition 22 was found (San Francisco County Superior Court, March 14, 2005) and confirmed upon appeal (California Supreme Court, May 15, 2008) to be unconstitutional.
Proposition 8 was created by opponents of same-sex marriage prior to the final ruling on In re Marriage Cases as a voter ballot initiative, and voted on at the time of the November 2008 elections. Its wording was precisely the same as Proposition 22, which as an ordinary statute, had been invalidated in 2008, but by re-positioning it as a State constitutional amendment rather than a legislative statute, it was able to circumvent the ruling from In re Marriage Cases.[14] The proposition did not affect domestic partnerships in California,[15] nor (following subsequent legal rulings) did it reverse same-sex marriages that had been performed during the interim period May to November 2008 (i.e. after In re Marriage Cases but before Proposition 8).[16][17][18]
Proposition 8 came into immediate effect on November 5, 2008, the day after the elections. Demonstrations and protests occurred across the state and nation. Same-sex couples and government entities, including couples who had married before then, filed numerous lawsuits with the California Supreme Court challenging the proposition's validity and effect on previously administered same-sex marriages. In Strauss v. Horton, the California Supreme Court upheld Proposition 8, but allowed the existing same-sex marriages to stand (under the grandfather clause principle). (Justice Carlos R. Moreno dissented that exceptions to the equal protection clause could not be made by any majority since its whole purpose was to protect minorities against the will of a majority.)
Although upheld in State court, Proposition 8 was ruled unconstitutional by the federal courts. In Perry v. Schwarzenegger, United States District Court Judge Vaughn Walker overturned Proposition 8 on August 4, 2010, ruling that it violated both the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the U.S. Constitution.[19] Walker issued a stay (injunction) against enforcing Proposition 8 and a stay to determine suspension of his ruling pending appeal.[20][21] The State of California did not appeal the ruling (with which it had agreed anyway) leaving the initiative proponents and one county to seek an appeal.
On appeal, a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel ruled the county had no right of appeal, and asked the California Supreme Court to rule whether the proponents of Prop 8 had the right to appeal (known as "standing") if the State did not do so. The California Supreme Court ruled that they did. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the federal district court's decision on February 7, 2012,[22] but the stay remained in place as appeals continued to the U.S. Supreme Court,[23] which heard oral arguments in the appeal Hollingsworth v. Perry on March 26, 2013.[24] On June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and ruled that the Ninth Circuit had erred in allowing the previous appeal, since in line with Article III of the Constitution and many prior cases unanimous on the point, being an initiative proponents is not enough by itself to have federal court standing or appeal a ruling in federal court. This left the original federal district court ruling against Proposition 8 as the outcome, and same sex marriages resumed almost immediately afterwards.
History of the ballot initiative Proposition 8 (ballot title: Eliminates Rights of Same-Sex Couples to Marry. Initiative Constitutional Amendment; originally titled the "California Marriage Protection Act")[25][26] was a California ballot proposition that changed the California Constitution to add a new section 7.5 to Article I, which reads: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."[3][4][5] This change restricted the definition of marriage to opposite-sex couples, and eliminated same-sex couples' right to marry, thereby overriding portions of the ruling of In re Marriage Cases by "carving out an exception to the preexisting scope of the privacy and due process clauses"[27] of the state constitution.
To qualify for the ballot, Proposition 8 needed 694,354 valid petition signatures, equal to 8% of the total votes cast for governor in the November 2006 general election. The initiative proponents submitted 1,120,801 signatures, and on June 2, 2008, the initiative qualified for the November 4, 2008 election ballot through the random sample signature check.[28]
Full text Proposition 8 consisted of two sections. Its full text was:[29]
SECTION 1. Title
This measure shall be known and may be cited as the "California Marriage Protection Act."
SECTION 2. Article I, Section 7.5 is added to the California Constitution, to read:
Sec. 7.5. Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.
Pre-election legal challenges Petition to remove proposition from ballot On July 16, 2008, the California Supreme Court denied a petition calling for the removal of Proposition 8 from the November ballot. The petition asserted the proposition should not be on the ballot on the grounds it was a constitutional revision that only the legislature or a constitutional convention could place before voters. Opponents also argued that the petitions circulated to qualify the measure for the ballot inaccurately summarized its effect. The court denied the petition without comment.[30] As a general rule, it is improper for courts to adjudicate pre-election challenges to a measure's substantive validity.[31] The question of whether Proposition 8 is a constitutional amendment or constitutional revision was ruled on by the California Supreme Court on May 26, 2009, and found that it was not a revision and therefore would be upheld. They also declared that the same-sex marriages performed prior to the passing of Prop 8 would remain valid.[32]
Challenge to title and summary The measure was titled: "Eliminates Rights of Same-Sex Couples to Marry. Initiative Constitutional Amendment." The ballot summary read that the measure "changes the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry in California."[33][34]
Proponents of the measure objected to the wording of the ballot title and summary on the grounds that they were argumentative and prejudicial. The resulting legal petition Jansson v. Bowen[35] was dismissed August 7, 2008, by California Superior Court Judge Timothy M. Frawley, who ruled that "the title and summary includes an essentially verbatim recital of the text of the measure itself",[36] and that the change was valid because the measure did, in fact, eliminate a right upheld by the California Supreme Court.
As California State Attorney General, Jerry Brown (shown here campaigning for Governor in 2010) had the ballot's description and title changed from "Limit on Marriage" to "Eliminates the right of same-sex couples to marry".
[37]California Attorney General Jerry Brown explained that the changes were required to more "accurately reflect the measure" in light of the California Supreme Court's intervening In re Marriage Cases decision.[38]
On July 22, 2008, Proposition 8 supporters mounted a legal challenge to the revised ballot title and summary, contending that Attorney General Brown inserted "language [...] so inflammatory that it will unduly prejudice voters against the measure".[39] Supporters claimed that research showed that an attorney general had never used an active verb like "eliminates" in the title of a ballot measure in the past fifty years in which ballot measures have been used.[39] Representatives of the attorney general produced twelve examples of ballot measures using the word "eliminates" and vouched for the neutrality and accuracy of the ballot language.[40][41]
On August 8, 2008, the California Superior Court turned down the legal challenge, affirming the new title and summary, stating, "the title and summary is not false or misleading because it states that Proposition 8 would 'eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry' in California." The Superior Court based their decision on the previous Marriages Cases ruling in which the California Supreme Court held that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry under the California Constitution.[38][42] That same day, proponents of Prop. 8 filed an emergency appeal with the state appeals court. The Court of Appeal denied their petition later that day and supporters did not seek a review by the Supreme Court of California.[43][44] The deadline for court action on the wording of ballot summaries and arguments in the voter pamphlet was August 11, 2008.[45]
While turning down the challenge to the title and summary, the California Superior Court also found that the Yes on 8 campaign had overstated its ballot argument on the measure's impact on public schools and ordered a minor change in wording. The original arguments included a claim that the Supreme Court's legalization of same-sex marriage requires teachers to tell their students, as young as kindergarten age, that same-sex marriage is the same as opposite-sex marriage. The court said the Yes on 8 argument was false because instruction on marriage is not required and parents can withdraw their children. The court said the ballot argument could be preserved by rewording it to state that teachers "may" or "could" be required to tell children there is no difference between same-sex and opposite-sex marriage.[42]
Campaign Campaign funding and spending The pro- and anti-Prop 8 campaigns spent a combined $106 million on the campaign.[46] This was not the most expensive California ballot proposition that year, however; the 2008 campaigns for and against Propositions 94, 95, 96, and 97, dealing with the expansion of Native American gambling, surpassed Prop 8, with combined expenditures of $172 million.[46]
By election day, volunteers on both sides spent thousands of hours getting their messages across to the state's 17.3 million registered voters.[47][48] The campaigns for and against Proposition 8 raised $39.0 million ($11.3 million or 29.1% from outside California) and $44.1 million ($13.2 million or 30.0% from outside California), respectively,[49] from over 64,000 people in all 50 states and more than 20 foreign countries, setting a new record nationally for a social policy initiative and more than for every other race in the country in spending except the presidential contest.[50] Contributions were much greater than those of previous same-sex marriage initiatives. Between 2004 and 2006, 22 such measures were on ballots around the country, and donations to all of them combined totaled $31.4 million, according to OpenSecrets.[51] A ProtectMarriage.com spokeswoman estimated that 36 companies which had previously contributed to Equality California were targeted to receive a letter requesting similar donations to ProtectMarriage.com.[52][53][54][55]
The California Fair Political Practices Commission fined the LDS Church in 2010 for failing to follow campaign disclosure policies during the last two weeks leading up to the election, which amounted to $37,000 in non-monetary contributions. They were fined $5,538.[56]
Both proponents and opponents of Proposition 8 made significant use of online tactics for campaigning. For example, over 800 videos were posted on YouTube, most consisting of original content and most taking a position against the Proposition. A greater proportion of 'Yes on 8' videos were scripted and professionally produced. Many 'No on 8' videos recorded demonstrations in the aftermath of the election.[57]
Proponents Proponents of the constitutional amendment argued that exclusively heterosexual marriage was "an essential institution of society", that leaving the constitution unchanged would "result in public schools teaching our kids that gay marriage is okay", and that gay people "do not have the right to redefine marriage for everyone else".[59]
The ProtectMarriage.com organization sponsored the initiative that placed Proposition 8 on the ballot[60] and continues to support the measure. The measure also attracted the support of a number of political figures and religious organizations.
Political figures Republican presidential nominee and U.S. Senator John McCain released a statement of support for the proposed constitutional amendment.[61] Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich released a video in support. Both characterized the court ruling requiring recognition of same sex marriage as being against the will of the people.[62] A political action committee run by former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, who personally supported the proposition, donated $10,000 to the National Organization for Marriage during their campaign for the proposition.[63]
Religious organizations The Roman Catholic Church,[64] as well as a Roman Catholic lay fraternal organization, the Knights of Columbus,[65] firmly supported the measure. The bishops of the California Catholic Conference released a statement supporting the proposition,[66] a position met with mixed reactions among church members, including clergy.[67][68]
George Hugh Niederauer as Archbishop of San Francisco campaigned in 2008 in favor of the Proposition, and claimed to have been instrumental in forging alliances between Catholics and Mormons to support the measure.[69] His successor, Salvatore Cordileone was regarded as instrumental in devising the initiative. Campaign finance records show he personally gave at least $6,000 to back the voter-approved ban[70] and was instrumental in raising $1.5 million to put the proposition on the ballot.[71] Subsequently, as archbishop of San Francisco, he has called publicly for an amendment to the US Constitution as "the only remedy in law against judicial activism" following the number of state same-sex marriage bans struck down by federal judges. He also attended and addressed the audience at the "March for Marriage", a rally opposing marriage for same-sex couples, in Washington, D.C., in June 2014.[72]
In California's 2008 election the Knights of Columbus attracted media attention when they donated more than $1.4 million to Proposition 8.[73] The Order was the largest financial supporter of the successful effort to maintain a legal definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman.[74]
Rally for Yes on Prop 8 in
FresnoThe Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints[75][76][77] (LDS Church), also publicly supported the proposition. The First Presidency of the church announced its support for Proposition 8 in a letter intended to be read in every congregation in California. In this letter, church members were encouraged to "do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time".[75] The church produced and broadcast to its congregations a program describing the support of the Proposition, and describing the timeline it proposes for what it describes as grassroots efforts to support the Proposition.[78] Local church leaders set organizational and monetary goals for their membership'--sometimes quite specific'--to fulfill this call.[79][80] The response of church members to their leadership's appeals to donate money and volunteer time was very supportive,[81] such that Latter-day Saints provided a significant source for financial donations in support of the proposition, both inside and outside the State of California.[82] LDS members contributed over $20 million,[83] about 45% of out-of-state contributions to ProtectMarriage.com came from Utah, over three times more than any other state.[84]ProtectMarriage, the official proponent of Proposition 8, estimates that about half the donations they received came from Mormon sources, and that LDS church members made up somewhere between 80% and 90% of the volunteers for early door-to-door canvassing.[85]
Other religious organizations that supported Proposition 8 include the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America,[86] Eastern Orthodox Church,[87] a group of Evangelical Christians led by Jim Garlow and Miles McPherson,[88] American Family Association, Focus on the Family[89] and the National Organization for Marriage.[90] Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church, also endorsed the measure.[91]
Others The Grossmont Union High School District in San Diego County, California, publicly voted on a resolution endorsing Proposition 8. The Governing Board voted 4''0 to endorse the amendment of the California State Constitution.[92]
The Asian Heritage Coalition held a rally in support of Proposition 8 in downtown San Diego on October 19, 2008.[93]
During the November 2008 election campaign, Porterville's City Council was the only City Council in California that passed a Resolution in favor of Proposition 8.[94]
"Whether You Like It or Not" advertisement Gay marriage press conference, 2008
In the months leading up to Election Day, Proposition 8 supporters released a commercial featuring San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom stating in a speech regarding same-sex marriage: "This door's wide open now. It's going to happen, whether you like it or not."[95] Some observers noted that polls shifted in favor of Proposition 8 following the release of the commercial; this, in turn, led to much speculation about Newsom's unwitting role in the passage of the amendment.[96][97][98]
Opponents Official "Vote NO on Prop 8" logo
Opponents argued that "the freedom to marry is fundamental to our society", that the California constitution "should guarantee the same freedom and rights to everyone", and that the proposition "mandates one set of rules for gay and lesbian couples and another set for everyone else". They also argued that "equality under the law is a fundamental constitutional guarantee" (see Equal Protection Clause).[59]
Equality for All was the lead organization opposed to Proposition 8.[99] They also ran the NoOnProp8.com campaign.[100] As with the measure's proponents, opponents of the measure also included a number of political figures and religious organizations. Some non-partisan organizations and corporations, as well as the editorial boards of many of the state's major newspapers, also opposed the measure.
Political figures Democratic presidential nominee and U.S. Senator Barack Obama stated that while he personally considered marriage to be between a man and woman,[101] and supported civil unions that confer comparable rights rather than gay marriage,[102] he opposed "divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution... the U.S. Constitution or those of other states".[103] Democratic vice-presidential candidate Joseph Biden also opposed the proposition.[104] Republican California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger stated that although he opposed and twice vetoed legislative bills that would recognize same-sex marriage in California, he respected and would uphold the court's ruling and oppose the initiative and other attempts to amend the state's constitution.[105][106] The U.S. House Speaker, California Representative (8th District), Nancy Pelosi[107] along with other members of the California congressional delegation and both of California's U.S. senators, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, voiced their opposition to Proposition 8.[108] Also voicing their opposition were the Lieutenant Governor, State Controller John Chiang, former governor and Attorney General Jerry Brown, 42 of 80 members of the state assembly, half of the state senators, and the mayors of San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego: Gavin Newsom, Antonio Villaraigosa, and Jerry Sanders, respectively.[109][110][111][112]
Religious organizations All six Episcopal diocesan bishops in California jointly issued a statement opposing Proposition 8 on September 10, 2008.[113] Southern California's largest collection of rabbis, the Board of Rabbis of Southern California, voted to oppose Proposition 8.[114] Other Jewish groups who opposed Proposition 8 include Jewish Mosaic,[115] the American Jewish Committee, Progressive Jewish Alliance, National Council of Jewish Women, and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).[86] The ADL filed amicus briefs urging the Supreme Court of California, Ninth Circuit, and the Supreme Court to invalidate Prop 8.[116] Los Angeles Jews were more opposed to Prop 8 than any other religious group or ethnic group in the city. Seventy-eight percent of surveyed Jewish Angelenos voted against the measure while only 8% supported the measure; the remainder declined to respond.[117] The legislative ministry of the Unitarian Universalists opposed Proposition 8, and organized phone banks toward defeating the measure.[118] They saw opposition to the proposition as a civil rights and social justice issue and their actions against it as a continuation of their previous works in civil rights.
In addition, the California Council of Churches urged the "immediate removal of Proposition 8"'--saying that it infringes on the freedom of religion for churches who wish to bless same-sex unions.[119]
Others The League of Women Voters of California opposed Proposition 8 because "no person or group should suffer legal, economic or administrative discrimination".[120] Additionally, all but two of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People's local chapters in California and NAACP national chairman Julian Bond and President Benjamin Jealous opposed Proposition 8.[121] Amnesty International also condemned Proposition 8, saying that "states should never withhold rights based on minority status".[122]
A coalition of Silicon Valley executives urged a 'No' vote on Proposition 8.[123] Google officially opposed Proposition 8 "as an issue of equality", and its founders donated $140,000 to the No on 8 campaign.[124][125][126] Apple Inc. also opposed Proposition 8 as a "fundamental" civil rights issue, and donated $100,000 to the No on 8 campaign.[126][127] Biotech leaders warned of potential damage to the state's $73 billion industry, citing Massachusetts as a top competitor for employees.[128]
Many members of the entertainment industry were opposed to Proposition 8.[129] Actor Tom Hanks, a strong supporter of same-sex marriage, was extremely outspoken about his opposition to the bill. Brad Pitt and Steven Spielberg each donated different amounts of money to the opposition campaign "No on 8".[130] In 2010, the documentary film 8: The Mormon Proposition premiered to sell-out audiences at the Sundance Film Festival.
The Los Angeles Unified School District Board of Education voted unanimously for a resolution to oppose Proposition 8.[131] The California Teachers Association donated one million dollars to fight Proposition 8.[132] Chancellor Robert Birgeneau of UC Berkeley urged a vote against the measure, claiming a likely threat to California's academic competitiveness if Proposition 8 is passed.[133]
Newspaper editorials All ten of the state's largest newspapers editorialized against Proposition 8, including the Los Angeles Times,[134] and the San Francisco Chronicle.[135][136][137][138][139][140][141][142][143] Other papers to have editorialized in opposition includeThe New York Times,[144] La Opini"n (Los Angeles),[145] and The Bakersfield Californian.[146]
Actions against supporters and opponents After the election, a number of protests were held against the referendum's passing. These included candlelight vigils outside organizations such as LDS churches that promoted the proposition.[147][148] Rallies against the amendment took place in California and across the country, with participants numbering in thousands.[149][150][151][152][153][154]
Boycotts were also a feature of public response to the outcome of the election. LGBT rights groups published lists of donors to the Yes on 8 campaign and organized boycotts of individuals or organizations who had promoted or donated to it.[155][156][157] Targets of the boycotts included the Sundance Film Festival in Utah, El Coyote Cafe, California Musical Theatre, and the Manchester Grand Hyatt Hotel.[157][158][159]
Some supporters of Proposition 8 reported receiving death threats, some of which claimed to be "stemming from Prop 8".[160][161] Some LDS churches were vandalized with spray paint.[162][163]
Fresno-area supporters of gay marriage were also harassed; "No On 8" signs at the Clovis Unitarian Universalist Church were torn up, with Reverend Bryan Jessup alleging that his church experienced vandalism "every night".[160] Santa Clara County Deputy District Attorney (DDA) Jay Boyarsky attributed a surge in anti-gay hate crimes, from 3 in 2007 to 14 in 2008, to controversy over Proposition 8.[164]
Pre-decision opinion polls Various opinion polls were conducted to estimate the outcome of the proposition. Those margins with differences less than their margins of error are marked as "n.s.", meaning not significant (see Statistical significance). Those margins considered statistically significant are indicated with the percentage points and the side favored in the poll, as either "pro" for in favor of the proposition's passage (e.g., 1% pro), or "con" for against its passage (e.g., 1% con).
According to the director of the Field Poll, the discrepancy between the pre-election polls and ballot results is because "regular church-goers ... were more prone than other voters to be influenced by last-minute appeals to conform to orthodox church positions when voting on a progressive social issue like same-sex marriage."[165]
Date of opinion pollConducted bySample size(likely voters)In favorAgainstUndecidedMarginMargin of ErrorOctober 29''31, 2008[166]SurveyUSA63747%50%3%n.s.±4%October 18''28, 2008[167]The Field Poll96644%49%7%5% con±3.3%October 12''19, 2008[168]Public Policy Institute of California1,18644%52%4%8% con±3%October 15''16, 2008[169]SurveyUSA61548%45%7%n.s.±4%October 4''5, 2008[170][171]SurveyUSA67047%42%10%5% pro±3.9%September 23''24, 2008[172][173]SurveyUSA66144%49%8%5% con±3.9%September 9''16, 2008[174]Public Policy Institute of California1,15741%55%4%14% con±3%September 5''14, 2008[175]The Field Poll83038%55%7%17% con±3.5%August 12''19, 2008[176][177]Public Policy Institute of California1,04740%54%6%14% con±3%July 8''14, 2008[18][178]The Field Poll67242%51%7%9% con±3.9%May 17''26, 2008[179]The Field Poll1,05242%51%7%9% con±3.2%May 22, 2008[180]Los Angeles Times/KTLA70554%35%11%19% pro±4%Results County Results
For 70%''80%
60%''70%
50%''60%
Against 70%''80%
60%''70%
50%''60%
Proposition 8[1]ChoiceVotes% Yes7,001,08452.24No6,401,48247.76Amending the California Constitution by voter initiative requires a simple majority to be enacted.[181]
Edison/Mitofsky conducted an exit poll on behalf of the National Election Pool which is the only source of data on voter demographics in California in the 2008 election.[182][183] The statistical trends from the exit poll of 2,240 voters suggested that an array of voters came out both in opposition to and in support of Proposition 8, with no single demographic group making up most of either the Yes or No vote. The National Election Pool poll showed that support for Proposition 8 was strong amongst African American voters, interviewed in the exit poll with 70% in favor, more than any other racial group.[184] Their support was considered crucial to the proposition's passing, since African Americans made up an unusually larger percentage of voters that year, due to the presence of Barack Obama on the ballot.[185] Polls by both the Associated Press and CNN mirrored this data, reporting support among black voters to be at 70%[186] and 75%,[187] respectively. A later study by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF), examining the black vote only from five counties within the state, suggested that black support was closer to 58%.[188][189]
Hispanic and Latino voters also voted for Proposition 8.[190]
Those who described themselves as religious were the strongest supporters of Prop 8.[191] According to the NGLTF study, self-identified Catholics and Protestants supported Prop 8 by measures of 55% and 66%, respectively,[192] while Jews overwhelmingly opposed it, with support at only 17%.[193][194] Young voters were more likely to have voted against the ballot measure than older voters, while Republicans were more likely to have supported the measure than were Democrats.[195]
County breakdown Breakdown of voting by county[1]CountyYesVotesNoVotesKern75.3%175,16724.7%57,496Tulare75.1%78,57824.9%26,113Modoc74.2%3,27925.8%1,142Kings73.7%25,82126.3%9,244Madera73.5%30,90626.5%11,193Glenn73.3%7,23526.7%2,644Tehama72.8%17,77727.2%6,675Colusa71.6%4,55628.4%1,815Lassen71.3%8,02128.7%3,241Merced70.8%44,80029.2%18,520Sutter70.4%23,03229.6%9,707Shasta69.7%55,69830.3%24,224Imperial69.7%27,04830.3%11,783Fresno68.7%185,99331.3%83,122Stanislaus67.9%108,98832.1%51,598Yuba67.6%14,32332.4%6,868San Bernardino66.8%404,76233.2%202,227San Joaquin65.5%135,72834.5%71,747Riverside64.7%417,13335.3%228,449Sierra64.2%1,27335.8%711Amador64.0%11,94536.0%6,725Calaveras63.9%14,62436.1%8,588Tuolumne62.6%16,96437.4%10,163Mariposa62.1%5,96137.9%3,640Inyo60.6%5,11639.4%3,334Del Norte60.1%5,65839.9%3,770Siskiyou60.0%12,66840.0%8,475Plumas60.0%6,57640.0%4,401Placer59.8%102,97740.2%69,444El Dorado58.3%53,83741.7%38,534Orange57.7%659,03742.3%484,015Trinity56.2%3,56343.8%2,785Butte56.1%54,82243.9%43,045Solano55.9%89,29244.1%70,680San Benito54.8%10,65745.2%8,794Sacramento53.9%289,37846.1%248,444San Diego53.8%655,62546.2%565,054Ventura52.9%178,71947.1%159,284Lake52.0%13,03648.0%12,080San Luis Obispo51.1%67,30448.9%64,555Los Angeles50.1%1,624,67249.9%1,622,287Nevada50.1%27,61749.9%27,614Monterey48.4%62,25151.6%66,191Santa Barbara46.4%80,11753.6%92,305Contra Costa44.6%198,71355.4%246,753Napa44.4%26,22755.6%32,742Mono44.2%2,42555.8%3,050Santa Clara44.2%291,34755.8%367,053Alpine43.6%29356.4%379Yolo41.3%32,81656.4%46,537Humboldt39.9%25,29660.1%37,963San Mateo38.2%114,69561.8%185,127Alameda38.0%232,92362.0%378,692Mendocino36.8%14,64963.2%25,072Sonoma33.5%76,14366.5%150,763Santa Cruz28.7%36,16371.3%89,793Marin24.9%34,32475.1%103,341San Francisco24.8%92,53675.2%280,491Post-election events Immediate response A post Prop 8 demonstration at the State Capitol
In California, a constitutional amendment passed by the electorate takes effect the day after the election.[181] On the evening of November 4 the "Yes on 8" campaign issued a statement by Ron Prentice, the chairman of ProtectMarriage.com, saying "The people of California stood up for traditional marriage and reclaimed this great institution."[196] The organizers of the "No on Prop 8" campaign issued a statement on November 6 saying, "Tuesday's vote was deeply disappointing to all who believe in equal treatment under the law."[197] The counties of Los Angeles, San Francisco, Yolo, Kern, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, Sonoma, San Diego, San Bernardino, Sacramento, and Tuolumne stopped issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples the day after the election.[198][199][200][201]
Following the passage of Proposition 8, mass protests took place across the state. These included protests outside the LDS Church's Los Angeles California Temple in Westwood, Los Angeles;[202] a march through Hollywood that blocked traffic and elicited police intervention;[203] a candlelight vigil in front of the Sacramento Gay and Lesbian Center and a large demonstration in front of the state capitol.[204] In San Francisco, thousands gathered in front of the City Hall, along with Mayor Gavin Newsom, to protest the proposition and to perform a candlelight vigil.[205]
Fines Following an audit by the California Franchise Tax Board, the proponents of Proposition 8 are facing a fine of $49,000 for violating California campaign finance disclosure laws, by failing to report $1,169,292 in contributions under the timelines required by state law.[206]
Protests Following the passage of Proposition 8, mass protests took place across the state. These included protests outside a temple of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Westwood, Los Angeles;[207] a march through Hollywood that blocked traffic and elicited police intervention;[208] and a candlelight vigil in front of the Sacramento Gay and Lesbian Center.[209]
On Sunday November 9 an estimated crowd of 4,000 people protested in front of the California State Capitol.[210] In San Francisco, thousands gathered in front of the City Hall to protest the proposition and to perform a candlelit vigil. Speakers who voiced their opinion in opposition of Proposition 8 included state senator Mark Leno and mayor Gavin Newsom.[211]
Outside California, a protest at the headquarters of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Salt Lake City, Utah[212] was addressed by local gay rights supporters including former Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson and three gay members of the Utah Legislature: Senator Scott McCoy and Representatives Christine Johnson and Jackie Biskupski.[213] On November 12, 2008, more than 10,000 protesters gathered outside the Manhattan New York Temple to protest the support of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for Proposition 8.[214] On November 15, 2008, tens of thousands of people in cities around the United States participated in rallies to protest the passage of Proposition 8 and to promote the expansion of civil marriage to same-sex couples throughout the nation.[215]
Boycotts The passage of Proposition 8 led to opponents responding by publicly shaming its supporters as bigots and boycotting supporters' businesses and employers. On November 7, 2008, a blogger revealed that Scott Eckern, then Artistic Director of California Musical Theatre, had made a personal donation of $1,000 to the "Yes on 8" campaign.[216] All campaign contributions of $1,000 or more required a name, home and occupation be listed. On November 10, gay artists condemned Eckern and called for a boycott of California Musical Theatre.[217] On November 11, Eckern issued an apology on the online site Playbill stating that a similar donation had been made to a human rights organization that includes gay rights as one of its causes.[218] On November 12, Eckern resigned from California Musical Theatre. Executive producer of the CMT Richard Lewis stated that Eckern was not forced to resign but did so of his own accord.[219]
Richard Raddon, Director of the Los Angeles Film Festival, also resigned due to boycotts by the gay community.[220]
Protests in California were marred by racial incidents. Due to their support of Proposition 8, reported as high as 70 percent, some African Americans attending events were allegedly subjected to racial epithets and felt threatened. California Assembly Speaker Karen Bass stated she was disturbed by the treatment of African Americans in the aftermath of the passage of the proposition.In reaction to the racial incidents, Evan Wolfson said, "In any fight, there will be people who say things they shouldn't say, but that shouldn't divert attention from what the vast majority are saying against this, that it's a terrible injustice."[221][222]
Media To protest the passage of Proposition 8, musical theatre composer Marc Shaiman wrote a satiric mini-musical called "Prop 8 '-- The Musical".[223] The three-minute video was distributed on the internet at FunnyOrDie.com. The cast includes Jack Black (who plays Jesus), Nicole Parker, Neil Patrick Harris, John C. Reilly, Allison Janney, Andy Richter, Maya Rudolph, Margaret Cho, Rashida Jones, Kathy Najimy, Sarah Chalke, Jennifer Lewis, John Hill and other celebrities. It was directed by Adam Shankman. The video satirizes Christian churches that selectively pick and choose biblical doctrines to follow.[224] It received 1.2 million internet hits in its first day,[225][226] won the 2009 Webby Award category Comedy: Individual Short or Episode,[227] and won a GLAAD media award.[228]
In 2010, 8: The Mormon Proposition, a documentary alleging the involvement of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the passage of Proposition 8. Written by Reed Cowan and narrated by Dustin Lance Black, the film divided critics over a perceived heavy-handed approach to the church's involvement; it won the 2011 GLAAD Media Award for Outstanding Documentary.
In 2011, 8, a play re-enacting the proceedings of Perry v. Brown in a condensed manner of documentary theatre, was premiered on Broadway.
Controversies about campaign financing and donations On November 13, 2008, Fred Karger of the group Californians Against Hate filed a complaint with the California Fair Political Practices Commission that campaign finance reports filed by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints under-reported its actual Proposition 8 campaign expenses as $2,078.97.[229][230] Karger charged that the Church's failure to report "non-monetary contributions" placed it in violation of California's Political Reform Act. Church spokesman Scott Trotter denied the charges, saying the church had "fully complied with the reporting requirements" and a "further report will be filed on or before [...the] due date, Jan. 30, 2009."[231]
In a report filed with the California Secretary of State's office January 30, 2009, the LDS Church reported its non-monetary expenditures as $189,903.58.[232] On January 31, the San Francisco Chronicle stated, "While the deadline for the report, which covers the period from July 1 to Dec. 31, is [February 2], many campaign contributions by major donors and independent committees must be reported within days after they're made." The article further stated that the executive director of the FPPC stated that the LDS church was still under investigation, and "In general, however, 'cases like these hinge over what had to be reported and when it had to be reported.' A late report covering disputed filings 'wouldn't remove the obligation to file on time' but would be considered by investigators."[233]
The Boston Herald reported on February 2, 2009:[234]
While many church members had donated directly to the Yes on 8 campaign'--some estimates of Mormon giving range as high as $20 million'--the church itself had previously reported little direct campaign activity.But in the filing made Friday, the Mormon church reported thousands in travel expenses, such as airline tickets, hotel rooms and car rentals for the campaign. The church also reported $96,849.31 worth of 'compensated staff time''--hours that church employees spent working to pass the same-sex marriage ban.
In a statement issued February 2, 2009, the LDS Church responded to "erroneous news reports", saying its subsequent disclosure was "in no way prompted by an investigation by the California Fair Political Practices Commission," that "We believe we have complied with California law," and that the report's filing date met the January 31, 2009 deadline:[235]
The Church, like other organizations on both sides of the ballot issue, was required to publicly file these donations by the 31 January deadline. The Church has been filing required contribution reports throughout the campaign. Those earlier donations 'initially stated' were filed for specific time periods prior to this last reporting period, as required by law. Other groups are also filing their final contribution reports to meet the same deadline.
On January 7, 2009, supporters of Proposition 8 filed a federal lawsuit to block public disclosure of their donations. Alleging threats against their lives as well as other forms of harassment, the lawsuit also requested a preliminary injunction that ordered the California Secretary of State to remove information about donations posted on its website. Opponents of Proposition 8 called it "hypocritical" that its supporters would refer to their support of the measure as the "will of the people" while seeking to overturn voter-approved campaign disclosure laws.[236] U.S. District Judge Morrison England, Jr. denied that request on January 29; he said that the public had the right to know about donors of political causes, that he did not agree that the plaintiffs had a probability of success in court, and that they had not proven they would suffer "irreparable injury" if he did not grant the preliminary injunction.[237]
Litigation California Supreme Court cases After the passage of Proposition 8, a number of lawsuits were filed by against the state and state officials with the intent of overturning the measure and arguing that Proposition 8 should not have retroactive effect on existing same-sex marriages. On November 13, 2008, the California Supreme Court asked California Attorney General Jerry Brown for an opinion on whether the Court should accept these cases for review and whether the measure should be suspended while they decide the case. On November 19, the Court accepted three lawsuits challenging Proposition 8 but denied the requests to stay its enforcement.[238] The Court asked for final briefs by January 5, 2009. Oral arguments were held on March 5, 2009.
On Tuesday May 26 the court ruled that "The Amendment to the State Constitution referred to as Proposition 8 is valid and enforceable from the moment it was passed."[citation needed ] The court also held that "Proposition 8 must be understood as creating a limited exception to the state equal protection clause."[239] Justice Moreno in his lone dissenting opinion, argued that such a change to the Constitution should only be implemented "by a constitutional revision to modify the equal protection clause to protect some, rather than all, similarly situated persons" and not by a simple majority vote.
The Court did rule that their decision cannot be applied to retroactively annul marriages that were transacted while the practice was legal in the state of California.[240] Proposition 8 has no retroactive effect. The California Supreme Court ruled unanimously on May 26, 2009, that the approximately 18,000 same-sex marriages that had occurred prior to Proposition 8's passage would still be valid and must continue to be recognized in the state, since the amendment does not state explicitly that it would nullify the same-sex marriages performed before it took effect.[240]
Later legislation clarified that same-sex couples who married out-of-state within the window of legality would also retain their legal marriage rights. The bill was signed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on October 11, 2009.[241]
Federal challenges Smelt v. United States Immediately following the passage of Proposition 8, Arthur Smelt and Christopher Hammer filed suit in the Southern Division of the United States District Court for the Central District of California, in Orange County. In the case, Smelt v. United States, the couple argued that Proposition 8 and the Federal Defense of Marriage Act violated the Equal Protection Clause of the American constitution.[242] The United States Justice Department filed a motion to dismiss the case because the "plaintiffs are married, and their challenge to the federal Defense of Marriage Act ("DOMA") poses a different set of questions."[243] On July 15, 2009, District Judge Carter dismissed the part of Smelt that challenged Proposition 8, finding that the fact that the plaintiffs were already legally married in California meant they had no standing to challenge Proposition 8. The challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act, however, remained intact.[244] The remainder of the case was heard on August 3, 2009, in an Orange County district court.[245] The lawsuit was thrown out because the two men had filed suit against the federal government in a state court, a technicality which meant the suit needed to be re-filed.[246]
Perry v. Schwarzenegger This article's
factual accuracy may be compromised due to out-of-date information.
Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information.
( June 2011 ) On the day of Strauss v. Horton 's decision, the American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER) filed suit in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to challenge the validity of Proposition 8. Lambda Legal, the ACLU, and the National Center for Lesbian Rights have since announced their support for the lawsuit.[247] San Francisco filed a motion to and was granted intervenor status in the case, saying that their work in In re Marriage Cases and Strauss v. Horton provided them with "extensive evidence and proposed findings on strict scrutiny factors and factual rebuttals to long claimed justifications for marriage discrimination".[248]
California Attorney General, and former and later again Governor Jerry Brown backed the lawsuit, saying that Proposition 8 violates the U.S. Constitution and should be struck down.[249] Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger took a more neutral path,[250] saying that he supported the lawsuit because the Proposition 8 conflict asks "important constitutional questions that require and warrant judicial determination." Because this means that the Californian government will not defend the law in court,[251] the proponents of Proposition 8's campaign were granted the right to intervene as defendants.[252] The case was first heard on July 2, 2009, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in San Francisco, Judge Vaughn R. Walker presiding.[253]
In an act unprecedented in California history both the Governor and Attorney General refused to defend a constitutional amendment.[254]
In August, Judge Walker heard further requests for intervenor status and ordered a trial set for January 2010.On August 4, 2010, U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker ruled Proposition 8 unconstitutional, but at the same time temporarily provided for a suspension of the ruling while he considered whether to grant an indefinite suspension pending appeal.[255] Walker lifted the stay on August 12, 2010, thus allowing same-sex marriages to be performed as of August 18, 2010[256]
On August 16, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit imposed a stay of all new same-sex marriages in the State of California. It also scheduled an accelerated time table for hearing an appeal of Judge Walker's ruling.[257] Before the appeal trial begins, there will be a December 6, 2010[needs update ] hearing on who has legal standing to appeal the District Court's decision and whether the proposition violates equal protection rights.[258]
Ballot repeal effort On April 30, 2009, the members of 'Yes! on Equality' submitted a ballot initiative dubbed "California Marriage Equality Act" to the Attorney General's office, requesting a title and summary. The text of the ballot would repeal Article I; Section 7.5 of the Californian Constitution as well as clarifying that no school curriculum will be changed and no clergy will be forced to perform any "service or duty incongruent with their faith". Yes! on Equality had until August 17, 2009, to gather 694,354 signatures in order to qualify for the June 2010 ballot,[259][260] A petition for initiative for the November 2010 ballot also failed to obtain enough signatures.[261][262]
Several LGBT groups of color (including API Equality-LA, HONOR PAC, and the Jordan/Rustin Coalition) published a statement "Prepare to Prevail,"[263] in which they argue that the ballot repeal effort should be delayed until 2012. As of February 2012, the repeal effort was canceled in light of victorious court cases.[264]
Legal challenges Following the passing of Proposition 8 in 2008, and the subsequent mass protests, several lawsuits were filed in both the State Supreme Court and in the Federal District Court.
State court: Strauss v. Horton In considering the cases within the state courts, on November 13, 2008, the California Supreme Court asked California Attorney General Jerry Brown for an opinion on whether the Court should accept these cases for review and whether the measure should be suspended while they decide the case. On November 19, the Court accepted three lawsuits challenging Proposition 8, which consolidated into Strauss v. Horton.[265] The Court rendered its decision on May 26, 2009. The majority decision was that Proposition 8 "carved out a limited [or 'narrow'] exception to the state equal protection clause"; Justice Moreno dissented that exceptions to the equal protection clause could not be made by any majority since its whole purpose was to protect minorities against the will of a majority. Until overturned by Hollingsworth v. Perry (below), the ruling established that Proposition 8 was valid as voted, but that marriages performed before it went into effect would remain valid.
Federal court Perry v. Schwarzenegger After the California Supreme Court upheld the voter initiative, a suit, Perry v. Schwarzenegger (later Hollingsworth v. Perry), was filed in a Federal District Court in San Francisco. On August 4, 2010, U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn Walker overturned Proposition 8, stating it is "...unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause because no compelling state interest justifies denying same-sex couples the fundamental right to marry."[266] The court also determined that "Proposition 8 violated the Equal Protection Clause because there is no rational basis for limiting the designation of 'marriage' to opposite-sex couples."[267] The court also stayed the ruling; the voter initiative was to remain in effect pending appeal.[20] On August 12, Walker announced his decision to lift the stay (which would have allowed same-sex marriages to be performed) as of August 18, 2010[update].[268][269]However, on August 16, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit indefinitely extended the District Court's stay, stopping new same-sex marriages in the state of California pending appeal. It also scheduled an accelerated time table for hearing an appeal of Walker's ruling.[270]
Perry v. Brown (on appeal) As the State of California chose not to appeal the ruling, an appeal was sought by two parties'--the initiative proponents, and Imperial County (via its deputy clerk). The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals considered the question of standing first. On January 4, 2011, the Ninth Circuit ruled that Imperial County did not have standing to intervene in the lawsuit (by now called Perry v. Brown)'--the formal reason being the county's appeal had been "untimely", but also that the appellant was the county's deputy clerk, and precedent existed in other cases that a deputy clerk could not 'represent' a county.
To address the question whether the initiative proponents had particularized standing (that is, standing either via personal interest, or standing to represent the State's interest), the Ninth Circuit certified a question to the California Supreme Court on January 4, 2011, asking that court to rule whether, under the California Constitution or otherwise under California law, non-governmental proponents of an initiative have standing to appeal when the State is no longer willing to defend it.[271] On February 16, 2011, the California Supreme Court unanimously agreed to address the Ninth Circuit's request.[272] The court set an expedited schedule for the hearing[273] and heard oral arguments on September 6, 2011.[274] On November 17, 2011, the California Supreme Court issued an advisory opinion that the proponents of Proposition 8 did have standing, and could defend it.[275][276]
Ninth Circuit ruling Seal of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
On February 7, 2012, a three-judge panel on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a 2''1 majority opinion affirming the judgment in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, which declared Proposition 8 unconstitutional, saying it violated the Equal Protection Clause. The opinion, written by Judge Stephen Reinhardt and joined by Judge Michael Hawkins, states that Proposition 8 did nothing more than lessen the status and dignity of gays and lesbians, and classify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples.[277] The court found that the people of California, by using their initiative power to target a minority group and withdraw the right to marry they once possessed under the California State Constitution, violated the federal Constitution.[278]
The court concluded that the trial court had correctly found Proposition 8 to have no purpose other than to impose the majority's private disapproval of gays, lesbians, and their relationships through the public law, and to take away from them the designation of marriage and its recognized societal status.[279] The findings of fact and expert witness testimony in District Court played an important role in this appellate decision, emphasizing that it is unreasonable to believe Proposition 8 was enacted to: promote childrearing by biological parents, encourage procreation, be cautious in social change, protect religious liberty, or control children's education.[280] The court declared that it is "implausible to think that denying two men or two women the right to call themselves married could somehow bolster the stability of families headed by one man and one woman".[281][282]
The dissenting judge, Judge N. Randy Smith, noted in his dissent that states do legitimately prohibit sexual relationships condemned by society such as incest, bigamy, and bestiality, and impose age limits for marriage without violating constitutional rights.[283] He stated that "gays and lesbians are not a suspect or quasi-suspect class" and are thus not entitled to the courts' increased scrutiny of laws that affect them.[283] He wrote, "The family structure of two committed biological parents'--one man and one woman'--is the optimal partnership for raising children." He also said that governments have a legitimate interest in "a responsible procreation theory, justifying the inducement of marital recognition only for opposite-sex couples" because only they can have children.[283] He urged judicial restraint, that the justices should refrain from striking down Proposition 8.[284]
En banc review denied On February 21, 2012, proponents requested to have to the case reviewed en banc by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.[285] If granted, en banc review could have taken a year or more, which would have delayed possible U.S. Supreme Court review.[285] Pending the appeal, a stay was continued, barring any marriages from taking place.[286] On June 5, 2012, the full Ninth Circuit refused to rehear the case; the stay would remain in place pending final action by the Supreme Court.[287]
The Ninth Court's ruling was subsequently vacated (withdrawn) although it affirmed the district court ruling, since the Supreme Court later determined that the proponents of Proposition 8 had not had standing to appeal the district court's ruling.
Hollingsworth v. Perry (U.S. Supreme Court) The proposition's proponents filed a petition for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court on July 30, 2012, requesting that the Supreme Court review the case.[288] Briefs in opposition both from the individual respondents and from the City and County of San Francisco were filed August 24, and the petitioners replied on September 4.[289] On December 7, 2012, the Supreme Court granted the proponents' petition for certiorari[290] and asked to be briefed for arguments concerning the petitioners' Article III standing,[291] amid considerable anticipation of a finding of a lack of justiciability in order to avoid a holding on the merits.[292] Oral arguments were heard on March 26, 2013.[24]
Parties who lodged amicus briefs with the court included: Judge Georg Ress and the Marriage Law Foundation; William N. Eskridge, Jr., et al.; the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence; the Public Advocate of the United States, et al.; the National Association of Evangelicals, et al.; the American Civil Rights Union; Judicial Watch, Inc., et al.; the Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund, Inc.; the Foundation for Moral Law; and the state of Indiana, et al.[289]
The Supreme Court issued a 5''4 decision on June 26, 2013.[293] Chief Justice Roberts wrote for the majority, and was joined by Justices Scalia, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Kagan.[293] Justices Kennedy, Thomas, Alito, and Sotomayor were in the minority.[294] The Court found the proponents did not have standing to appeal in federal court. To have standing, they "must have suffered an injury in fact, thus giving [them] a sufficiently concrete interest in the outcome of the issue in dispute".[11] Because no injury had been shown, the appeal to the Ninth Circuit should have been dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. (This only applied to the Ninth Circuit and Supreme Court cases.) The Court returned the case to the Ninth Circuit with instructions to dismiss the appeal. This left the district court's ruling overturning Proposition 8 as the final ruling in the case. Because the appeal was decided on the question of standing, the Supreme Court did not examine nor rule on whether in their view Proposition 8 had violated the U.S. Constitution.
Justice Kennedy, writing for the minority, said the views of the California Supreme Court on the proponents' standing should have been respected,[11] because "the basic premise of the initiative process [and] the essence of democracy is that the right to make law rests in the people and flows to the government, not the other way around".[7]:'Š13'Š
Aftermath Plaintiffs Perry and Stier at the June 30, 2013, Pride Parade in San Francisco after their marriage
On June 28, 2013, the Ninth Circuit lifted its stay of the district court's ruling, enabling same-sex marriages to resume;[12] minutes afterward, plaintiffs Perry and Stier became the first couple in California to legally wed under state law since the enactment of Proposition 8 in 2008, doing so at San Francisco City Hall at 4:45 PDT, with California's Attorney General Kamala Harris officiating at the ceremony.[295]
There were two legal challenges made to the implementation of the ruling, both subsequently denied:
Federal court legal challenge to removal of stay
On June 29, 2013, the proponents of Proposition 8 filed an emergency motion with the U.S. Supreme Court to vacate the Ninth Circuit's lifting of its stay, claiming it had been "premature".
[296] The next day, June 30, 2013, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, responsible for overseeing the Ninth Circuit, denied the motion without comment.
[297]State court legal challenges to statewide implementation of ruling
Even before the Ninth Circuit lifted its stay, Proposition 8 proponents had expressed the intent to fight on, by asserting that the ruling only applies to the persons or counties involved and would be unlawful for other couples or counties to comply with it.
[298]Two petitions to this effect were filed with the California Supreme Court, by proponents (Hollingsworth v. O'Connell and Brown, July 12, 2013) and'--against county policy'--by a San Diego County Clerk (Dronenburg, July 19, 2013: dropped August 2 as duplicative). The proponents' petition challenged the state and county clerk responses to the ruling in Perry, asserting that, in their view, only two counties were affected by the ruling and other counties had no legal capacity to discretionally do likewise; that the plaintiffs, not representing a class, had their relief while others who were not plaintiffs had no change to their position within the law; and that county clerks were not in fact covered by the ruling and were therefore bound to comply with the law as it stood.
This position was rejected by California's governor, who on legal advice[299] ordered the change to license issuance, according to the ruling.[300] California's Attorney General Kamala Harris noted that "state officials are obligated to govern marriage equally in all counties and that [United States District Court for the Northern District of California Chief Judge Vaughn] Walker's ruling specifically covers those officials."[298] San Francisco's city attorney stated that it was "the most basic concepts of American law ... that a state court will not overrule the federal judiciary".[299] Twenty-four County Clerks stated, through their lawyer, that their role was "ultimately state supervised" and it would be unfeasible to have a "patchwork" of different marriage criteria varying between the counties of a single state.[301]
On July 15, the California Supreme Court unanimously declined the request to order an immediate halt to same-sex marriages in the state pending a decision on the petition. The court requested arguments from the parties on the points raised in their petition.
[302] On August 14, 2013, the California Supreme Court unanimously rejected the challenge by Proposition 8 proponents.
[303]See also Briggs InitiativeHouston Proposition 1 (2015)'--a veto referendum which led to the repealing of an ordinance protecting LGBTQ rights.LGBT rights in CaliforniaList of former U.S. state constitutional amendments banning same-sex unions by typeObergefell v. Hodges'--a 2015 U.S. Supreme Court case holding that the right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples.San Francisco 2004 same-sex weddings'--a prior controversy that sparked In re Marriage Cases and led to Proposition 8SaveCalifornia.comUnited States v. Windsor'--a 2013 U.S. Supreme Court case, decided along with Hollingsworth v. Perry, that struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, thereby granting federal benefits to same sex couple who are married under state law8 (or 8 the Play)'--an American play that portrays the closing arguments of Perry v. Schwarzenegger, the federal trial that led to the overturn of Proposition 8References ^ a b c "Statement of Vote: 2008 General Election" (PDF) . California Secretary of State. December 13, 2008. Archived from the original (PDF) on May 6, 2013 . Retrieved June 26, 2013 . ^ "Pro-Family Group Says Effort to Ban Calif. Gay 'Marriage' Looks 'Strong' ". Christianpost.com. 2008-04-05 . Retrieved 2013-11-01 . ^ a b Scan of Initiative filing Archived 2015-04-25 at the Wayback Machine from California Attorney General's web site ^ a b "Propositions that are on the November 4, 2008 General Election Ballot Archived June 17, 2009, at the Wayback Machine", California Secretary of State ^ a b Text of Proposition 8 Archived 2013-04-18 at the Wayback Machine, Official Voter Information Guide (draft copy). Retrieved July 28, 2008 ^ "Judge strikes down Prop. 8, allows gay marriage in California". Los Angeles Times. August 4, 2010 . Retrieved February 22, 2012 . ^ a b "Hollingsworth et al. v. Perry et al. Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit No. 12''144. Argued March 26, 2013'--Decided June 26, 2013" (PDF) . Retrieved 2013-12-03 . ^ "No. 10-16606" (PDF) . US Courts. February 7, 2012 . Retrieved April 17, 2021 . ^ "Prop 8 ruling explained: Why gay marriage will resume in California. NBC June 26, 2013". Nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com. 2013-06-26 . Retrieved 2013-12-03 . ^ Savage, David G. (2013-06-26). "Prop. 8: Supreme Court clears way for gay marriage in California. LA Times June 26, 2013 Politics Now". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved 2013-12-03 . ^ a b c Schwartz, John (26 June 2013). "Guide to the Supreme Court Decision on Proposition 8" '' via NYTimes.com. ^ a b Dolan, Maura (2013-06-28). "Prop 8: Gay marriages can resume in California, court rules". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved 2013-12-03 . ^ "San Jose recognizes gay marriage". Chicago Tribune. March 10, 2004 . Retrieved February 21, 2012 . ^ "California Constitution Article XVIII". Archived from the original on 2008-12-10. ^ Wisckol, Martin (February 4, 2009). "Gays would lose few legal rights with marriage ban". Orange County Register. Archived from the original on February 12, 2009 . Retrieved February 12, 2009 . ^ John Schwartz (May 26, 2009). "California High Court Upholds Gay Marriage Ban". The New York Times . Retrieved December 17, 2009 . ^ "Same-Sex Married Couples". California Franchise Tax Board. 2009-05-26 . Retrieved December 17, 2009 . ^ a b Fowler, Geoffrey A.; Bravin, Jess (February 8, 2012). "Court Rejects State Ban On Gay Marriage". The Wall Street Journal. pp. A1, A4. ^ "Ruling by United States District Court" (PDF) . San Francisco Chronicle. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-03-07. ^ a b Egelko, Bob; Bulwa, Demian (August 4, 2010). "Judge strikes down ban on same-sex marriage". San Francisco Chronicle . Retrieved August 4, 2010 . ^ Keys, Matthew (August 4, 2010). "Federal Judge: Same Sex Marriage Ban Under Proposition 8 Violates Constitution". FOX40.com. Archived from the original on 2012-08-07. ^ "Prop. 8: Gay-marriage ban unconstitutional, court rules". Los Angeles Times. February 7, 2012 . Retrieved February 7, 2011 . ^ Bulwa, Demian; Fagan, Kevin; Gordon, Rachel (August 22, 2010). "Prop. 8: Appeals court puts ruling on hold". San Francisco Chronicle. Archived from the original on 2012-03-04. ^ a b "Hollingsworth v. Perry, Proceedings and Orders". Supreme Court of the United States . Retrieved January 7, 2013 . ^ Sayre, Ben; Bode, Leticia; Shah, Dhavan; Wilcox, Dave; and Shah, Chirag (2010) "Agenda Setting in a Digital Age: Tracking Attention to California Proposition 8 in Social Media, Online News and Conventional News", Policy & Internet: Vol. 2: Iss. 2, Article 2, Page 11. doi:10.2202/1944-2866.1040 ^ "Text of Proposed Laws" (PDF) . Official Voter Information Guide. State of California. p. 128 . Retrieved August 28, 2012 . SECTION 1. Title: This measure shall be known and may be cited as the "California Marriage Protection Act." ^ Werdegar, Kathryn Mickle (May 26, 2009). "California Supreme Court Concurring Decision by Werdeger" (PDF) . p. 35 . Retrieved February 11, 2012 . ^ Folmar, Kate (June 2, 2008). "Secretary of State Debra Bowen Certifies Eighth Measure for November 4, 2008, General Election" (PDF) . California Secretary of State. Archived from the original (PDF) on September 10, 2008 . Retrieved August 7, 2008 . ^ Scan of Initiative Archived 2015-04-25 at the Wayback Machine from California Attorney General website. ^ Dolan, Maura (July 17, 2008). "Bid to ban gay marriage will stay on ballot, California Supreme Court rules". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved August 7, 2008 . ^ Costa v. Superior Court (2006) 37 Cal.4th 986, 1005''1006. ^ "Official Prop 8 Ruling Document". SFist. May 26, 2009. Archived from the original on May 29, 2009 . Retrieved May 26, 2009 . ^ "Initiative Measure Title and Summary (07-0068)" (PDF) . California Attorney General. November 29, 2007. Archived from the original (PDF) on June 24, 2008 . Retrieved June 23, 2008 . ^ "Ballot Label (Proposition 8)". California Secretary of State. July 3, 2008. Archived from the original (PDF) on April 30, 2009. ^ Garrison, Jessica (July 29, 2008). "Opponents of gay marriage say they will sue over changed wording in Proposition 8". Los Angeles Times. ^ "California Elections Code". The State of California. Archived from the original on July 30, 2009 . Retrieved December 6, 2008 . ^ Phillip Matier; Andrew Ross (October 26, 2008). "Jerry Brown's wording may trip up Prop. 8". San Francisco Chronicle . Retrieved June 27, 2013 . ^ a b Jansson v. Bowen, et al., Petition for Writ of Mandate, Order After Hearing (Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento August 7, 2008). ^ a b "Lawsuit filed to challenge California ballot's 'inflammatory' rewording of marriage amendment". CNA. Catholic News Agency. August 1, 2008. Archived from the original on February 14, 2009 . Retrieved March 28, 2009 . ^ Garrison, Jessica (July 28, 2008). "Gay marriage foes challenge ballot wording". AZ Central.com . Retrieved August 7, 2008 . ^ "Request for judicial notice in support of opposition to petition for writ of mandate" (PDF) . Attorney General of the State of California. August 4, 2008. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2009-03-27. ^ a b Egelko, Bob (August 8, 2008). "Judge refuses to order change in Prop. 8 title". San Francisco Chronicle . Retrieved August 8, 2008 . ^ Egelko, Bob (August 12, 2008). "Prop. 8 backers drop challenge on wording". San Francisco Chronicle. ^ "Order Denying Petition (Case No. C059606)". California Court of Appeal, 3rd District. August 8, 2008. ^ Egelko, Bob (August 12, 2008). "Prop. 8 backers drop challenge on wording". San Francisco Chronicle . Retrieved October 25, 2008 . ^ a b Reid Wilson, The most expensive ballot initiatives, Washington Post (May 17, 2014). ^ Leff, Lisa (October 2, 2008). "California marriage initiative sparks 'War of the Rings' ". Gilroy Dispatch. Associated Press . Retrieved August 23, 2016 . ^ "Record 17.3 million Californians registered to vote" (PDF) . California Secretary of State. October 20, 2008. Archived from the original (PDF) on October 17, 2012 . Retrieved August 2, 2013 . ^ "Proposition 8: Who gave in the gay marriage battle?". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved June 30, 2012 . ^ "California Same-Sex Marriage Initiative Campaigns Shatter Spending Records". U.S. News & World Report. October 29, 2008 . Retrieved October 29, 2008 . ^ Morain, Dan; Garrison, Jessica (October 25, 2008). "Proposition 8 proponents and foes raise $60 million". Los Angeles Times. ^ Prentice, Ron; Mark Jansson; Edward Dolejsi; Andrew Pugno (October 20, 2008). "Letter addressed to Abbott and Associates" (PDF) . towleroad.com. Archived from the original (PDF) on August 2, 2013 . Retrieved August 2, 2013 . ^ Leff, Lisa (October 23, 2008). "Calif. gay marriage ban backers target businesses". The San Francisco Chronicle. Associated Press. Archived from the original on October 25, 2008 . Retrieved October 23, 2008 . ^ "Equality California Sponsors". Archived from the original on December 19, 2008 . Retrieved November 13, 2008 . ^ "Threatening Letters Spark New Prop 8 Controversy". KFMB-TV, San Diego. October 23, 2008. Archived from the original on October 24, 2008 . Retrieved October 23, 2008 . ^ Vives, Ruben (June 9, 2010). "Mormon Church to be fined by state political commission over Proposition 8". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved June 9, 2010 . ^ Thorson, Kjerstin; Brian Ekdale; Porismita Borah; Kang Namkoong; Chirag Shah (2010). "YouTube and Proposition 8: A case study in video activism". Information, Communication & Society. 13 (3): 325. doi:10.1080/13691180903497060. S2CID 142856714. ^ "ProtectMarriage.com "Get a Yard Sign"'--the official "Yes on 8" sign". Archived from the original on October 22, 2008. ^ a b "California General Election Tuesday November 4 Voter Information Guide". sos.ca.gov. Archived from the original on November 18, 2012 . Retrieved December 6, 2012 . ^ "ProtectMarriage.com". Archived from the original on October 10, 2008 . Retrieved July 7, 2008 . ^ "McCain Supports Efforts to Ban Gay Marriage". U.S. News & World Report. June 27, 2008 . Retrieved September 1, 2008 . ^ Gingrich, Newt. "Stop Imperial Judges...Support Proposition 8". Newt Gingrich . Retrieved October 1, 2008 . ^ Eggen, Dan (March 31, 2012). "Romney under fire for PAC donation to anti-gay marriage group". The Washington Post. ^ "Catholic Bishops Endorse Prop. 8". 2008-08-08 . Retrieved January 22, 2014 . ^ "Proposition 8 to Protect Marriage Receives $1 Million Donation from the Knights of Columbus Catholic Organization" . Retrieved September 19, 2008 . ^ "A Statement of the Catholic Bishops of California in Support of Proposition 8". California Catholic Conference. Archived from the original on February 2, 2014 . Retrieved January 22, 2014 . ^ "Catholic Bishops Endorse Prop. 8". Archived from the original on February 14, 2009 . Retrieved September 19, 2008 . ^ "I was Blackballed". Archived from the original on July 8, 2011 . Retrieved February 2, 2009 . ^ Kuruvila, Matthai (November 10, 2008) "To Pass Measure, Catholics and Mormons Allied". San Francisco Chronicle. (Retrieved 11-10-08.) ^ Salvatore Cordileone, Gay Marriage Opponent And Prop. 8 Creator, Named Archbishop Of San Francisco, Huffington Post 7/27/2012 ^ Nancy Pelosi urges S.F. archbishop to exit marriage march, San Francisco Chronicle, 6/14/14 ^ Adams, Heather (June 19, 2014). "Thousands Rally at U.S. Capital Against Gay Marriage". Religion News . Retrieved April 17, 2021 . ^ Shereen Marisol Meraji (February 7, 2012). "LA Catholics react to Prop 8 decision; many Catholics strongly supported the proposition". 89.3 KPCC . Retrieved 2013-08-15 . ^ "California Secretary of State '' CalAccess '' Campaign Finance". California Secretary of State . Retrieved 2013-06-28 . ^ a b "California and Same-Sex Marriage". 2008-06-30 . Retrieved September 5, 2008 . ^ "LDS Donate Millions to Fight Gay Marriage". Archived from the original on September 18, 2008 . Retrieved September 17, 2008 . ^ "Prop 8 supporters see surge in donations". Archived from the original on September 21, 2008 . Retrieved September 19, 2008 . ^ "Church Readies Members on Proposition 8". October 8, 2008 . Retrieved February 24, 2009 . ^ Kirchick, James. "The New Religious Right". The Advocate. Archived from the original on February 14, 2009 . Retrieved June 18, 2009 . ^ "Preserving Traditional Marriage and Strengthening Families" (PDF) . The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. June 20, 2008 . Retrieved June 18, 2009 . ^ "Preserving the Divine Institution of Marriage". The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 2008-08-13 . Retrieved October 24, 2008 . ^ "LDS donate millions to fight gay marriage". September 16, 2008. Archived from the original on October 19, 2008 . Retrieved October 30, 2008 . ^ Moral Argument, Religion, and Same-Sex Marriage: Advancing the Public Good, Emily R. Gill, Jason Pierceson, page x (introduction) ^ "Opponents of gay marriage ban ride wave of donations". October 24, 2008 . Retrieved October 30, 2008 . ^ McKinley, Jesse; Johnson, Kirk (November 14, 2008). "Mormons Tipped Scale in Ban on Gay Marriage". The New York Times . Retrieved December 24, 2008 . ^ a b "Orthodox Join Fight Against Gay Nuptials". The Forward . Retrieved September 19, 2008 . ^ "Orthodox Christian Bishops of California in support of Proposition 8". ^ "Christian Marriage Movement's Ground Zero" . Retrieved September 19, 2008 . ^ "Prop 8 supporters see surge in donations". Archived from the original on December 2, 2008 . Retrieved September 19, 2008 . ^ Newspapers, McClatchy (September 16, 2008). "California's ballot battle over gay marriage shows US cultural divide". The Guardian. London . Retrieved September 17, 2008 . ^ Warren, Rick (October 23, 2008). "Pastor Rick's News & Views". Saddleback Church. Archived from the original on October 27, 2008 . Retrieved April 19, 2009 . ^ "Resolution for the Endorsement of Proposition 8'--The California Marriage Protection Act" (PDF) . Grossmont Union High School District. July 31, 2008. Archived from the original (PDF) on October 29, 2008 . Retrieved October 13, 2008 . ^ Gustafson, Craig (October 19, 2008). "Asian group rallies for traditional marriage". Union Tribune. Archived from the original on February 21, 2009 . Retrieved October 19, 2008 . ^ Haagenson, Gene (2009). "Prop 8 debate underway in Porterville". KFSN-TV News. Fresno: abc30.com. Archived from the original on June 4, 2011 . Retrieved November 9, 2009 . ^ Allday, Erin (November 6, 2008). "Newsom was central to same-sex marriage saga". San Francisco Chronicle . Retrieved October 31, 2011 . ^ Newsom seeks to get beyond Prop. 8 fiasco in quest to become governor Archived February 11, 2009, at the Wayback Machine ^ " 'Historic' campaign scored Prop 8's win in California". Bpnews.net. November 6, 2008. Archived from the original on June 15, 2011 . Retrieved October 31, 2011 . ^ Darman, Johnatha (January 17, 2009). "Hoping That Left Is Right". Newsweek . Retrieved June 18, 2009 . ^ "Join No On Prop 8, Equality For All". Equality for All. Archived from the original on February 23, 2010 . Retrieved July 31, 2008 . ^ "Vote No On Prop 8". Archived from the original on September 20, 2008 . Retrieved September 21, 2008 . ^ Obama, Barack (June 7, 2006). "Obama Statement on Vote Against Constitutional Amendment to Ban Gay Marriage". Senate. Archived from the original on December 8, 2008 . Retrieved October 13, 2008 . ^ "Obama on same sex marriage". CNN. January 25, 2008 . Retrieved October 13, 2008 . ^ Rojas, Aurelio (July 1, 2008). "Obama rejects proposed California gay marriage ban". Sacramento Bee. Archived from the original on July 31, 2008 . Retrieved August 13, 2008 . ^ "Biden says he had oppose Calif. gay marriage ban". San Francisco Chronicle. October 20, 2008. Archived from the original on October 22, 2008 . Retrieved October 21, 2008 . ^ Allison Hoffman (April 12, 2008). "Schwarzenegger: No to Marriage Amendment". Associated Press. Archived from the original on April 20, 2008. ^ "Gov. Schwarzenegger Issues Statement on Today's State Supreme Court Ruling" (Press release). Office of the Governor of California. May 15, 2008. Archived from the original on May 17, 2008. ^ "Pelosi Statement on California State Supreme Court Ruling on Gay Marriage" (Press release). House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. May 15, 2008. Archived from the original on August 2, 2008. ^ "Feinstein opposes Prop 8". Bay Area Reporter. September 11, 2008. ^ Hemmelgarn, Seth (September 11, 2008). "Feinstein silent on Prop 8". Bay Area Reporter . Retrieved September 17, 2008 . ^ "Gavin Newsom Speaks on Prop 8". YouTube . Retrieved September 17, 2008 . ^ "San Diego Mayor Stands Up For Marriage Equality". YouTube . Retrieved October 2, 2008 . ^ "Who Opposes Prop 8?". No On 8, Equality for All . Retrieved August 1, 2013 . ^ Helfand, Duke (September 11, 2008). "California's top Episcopal bishops oppose gay marriage ban". Los Angeles Times. ^ "Southern California rabbi board opposes gay marriage ban". Los Angeles Times. September 27, 2008 . Retrieved March 12, 2021 . ^ Drinkwater, Gregg (October 20, 2008). "Speaking out for love, justice and the freedom to marry". Jewish Mosaic. Archived from the original on February 14, 2009 . Retrieved October 25, 2008 . ^ "BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE ET AL. IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS". Archived from the original on 2013-03-07 . Retrieved 2013-11-01 . ^ "Most L.A. Jews voted against same-sex ban". Jewish Telegraphic Agency. November 9, 2008. Archived from the original on July 11, 2012. ^ Deakin, Michelle Bates (October 20, 2008). "Unitarian Universalists work to preserve gay marriage in Calif". UUWorld . Retrieved December 24, 2008 . ^ "CA Council of Churches Condemn Court Decision" (PDF) . CA Council of Churches. May 26, 2009. Archived from the original (PDF) on January 12, 2012 . Retrieved August 1, 2013 . ^ "Vote No on Proposition 8". League of Women Voters of California. Archived from the original on 2008-10-12. ^ Garofoli, Joe (June 16, 2009). "NAACP weighs support of gays who want to marry". San Francisco Chronicle . Retrieved June 17, 2009 . ^ "Amnesty International Urges California Supreme Court to Overturn Prop 8 and Restore Marriage Equality". Newswire. Archived from the original on May 22, 2009 . Retrieved March 4, 2009 . ^ "Silicon Valley Stands United Against Prop. 8". TechCrunch. October 30, 2008 . Retrieved October 31, 2008 . ^ "Our position on California's No on 8 campaign". September 26, 2008 . Retrieved September 29, 2008 . ^ "Google, Apple Openly Support Fight Against 'Proposition 8' ". October 25, 2008 . Retrieved July 11, 2013 . ^ a b "Apple to oppose anti-gay marriage ballot question". October 24, 2008. Archived from the original on March 10, 2012 . Retrieved October 24, 2008 . ^ Quinn, Michelle (October 24, 2008). "Apple donates $100,000 to fight same-sex marriage ban". Los Angeles Times. ^ Somers, Terri (October 29, 2008). "Proposition 8 would blunt biotech edge, execs say". San Diego Union-Tribune. Archived from the original on November 1, 2008 . Retrieved October 29, 2008 . ^ Lang, Derrik (October 22, 2008). "Hollywood comes out in support of gay marriage". Archived from the original on October 27, 2008 . Retrieved October 27, 2008 . ^ "Spielberg Makes Like Pitt, Supports Same-Sex Marriage'--E! Online". Uk.eonline.com. September 23, 2008 . Retrieved October 31, 2011 . ^ "LA Unified Opposes Prop. 8". LA Weekly. September 10, 2008. Archived from the original on September 24, 2008 . Retrieved October 13, 2008 . ^ Larrubia, Evelyn (October 17, 2008). "Teachers Union Donates $1 Million to Oppose Proposition 8". LA Times . Retrieved October 17, 2008 . ^ "Chancellor Birgeneau informs campus of likely impacts of Proposition 8". October 22, 2008 . Retrieved October 29, 2008 . ^ "Reneging on a right". Los Angeles Times. August 8, 2008 . Retrieved September 29, 2008 . ^ "Californians should reject Proposition 8". San Francisco Chronicle. October 1, 2008 . Retrieved October 2, 2008 . ^ "Gay marriage right should not be repealed". San Diego Union-Tribune. September 18, 2008. Archived from the original on September 21, 2008 . Retrieved September 29, 2008 . ^ "California Prop. 8 Editorial: Intrusion into marriage should be even-handed". The Orange County Register. October 1, 2008. Archived from the original on October 7, 2008 . Retrieved October 2, 2008 . ^ "Endorsements '08: Say 'No' to all propositions except 11". Sacramento Bee. October 9, 2008. Archived from the original on October 14, 2008 . Retrieved October 9, 2008 . ^ "Editorial: Initiative against gay marriage must be defeated". San Jose Mercury News. August 17, 2008 . Retrieved September 29, 2008 . ^ "Times recommendations on California propositions". Contra Costa Times. October 19, 2008 . Retrieved October 20, 2008 . ^ "No on 8". The Press-Enterprise. September 27, 2008. Archived from the original on September 10, 2012 . Retrieved October 20, 2008 . ^ "No on Prop. 8". The Fresno Bee. October 21, 2008. Archived from the original on October 24, 2008 . Retrieved October 21, 2008 . ^ "No on Prop. 8". Daily News. October 20, 2008. Archived from the original on October 17, 2008 . Retrieved October 21, 2008 . ^ "Preserving California's Constitution". The New York Times. September 28, 2008 . Retrieved September 29, 2008 . ^ "Una propuesta innecesaria". La Opini"n (in Spanish). October 9, 2008. Archived from the original on October 23, 2008 . Retrieved October 21, 2008 . ^ "Vote no on Proposition 8". The Bakersfield Californian. October 15, 2008. Archived from the original on October 17, 2008 . Retrieved October 28, 2008 . ^ Maher, Sean (November 10, 2008). "Anti-Prop 8 demonstrators protest near Mormon temple". Oakland Tribune . Retrieved December 24, 2008 . ^ Blankenfeld, Budy (November 2, 2008). "LDS moms hold vigil against Prop. 8". ABC4. Archived from the original on 2011-06-17 . Retrieved December 24, 2008 . ^ McKinley, Jesse (15 November 2008). "Across U.S., Big Rallies for Same-Sex Marriage". The New York Times '' via NYTimes.com. ^ "wbztv.com: 4,000 In Boston Protest Calif. Gay Marriage Ban". Archived from the original on February 28, 2010. ^ "dallasnews.com: 1,200 protest California's gay-marriage ban at Dallas City Hall". Archived from the original on August 24, 2009. ^ "Orland Sentinel: 'National Day of Protest' of gay-marriage bans includes Orlando, 85 other cities". Archived from the original on 2011-08-10. ^ Gammage, Jeff. "Gay-rights rally in Phila. part of nationwide protest". www.inquirer.com . Retrieved 2021-01-16 . ^ "San Francisco Chronicle: Bay Area demonstrations condemn Prop. 8". The San Francisco Chronicle. Archived from the original on January 27, 2012. ^ Ostrom, Mary Anne (November 13, 2008). "Protests, boycotts erupt in the wake of Prop. 8's passage". The Mercury News. ^ Abramowitz, Rachel (November 23, 2008). "Liberal Hollywood ponders next step in fight for same-sex marriage". Los Angeles Times. ^ a b Hofler, Robert (November 17, 2008). "Same-Sex Activists Target Sundance". Variety. ^ Carlton, Jim (December 27, 2008). "Gay Activists Boycott Backers of Prop 8". The Wall Street Journal. ^ Ainsworth, Bill (July 10, 2008). "Gay rights groups to boycott Manchester Grand Hyatt". San Diego Union Tribune. Archived from the original on March 24, 2009 . Retrieved June 16, 2009 . ^ a b "Prop 8 Threat: Fresno Police close to Arrest" Archived 2011-05-21 at the Wayback Machine, by Andres Araiza, KFSN-TV30/Fresno, October 31, 2008 ^ "Prop 8 Death Threats" Archived 2011-06-04 at the Wayback Machine, by Amanda Perez, KFSN-TV30/Fresno, October 31, 2008 ^ "Prop 8 Protesting Turns Ugly". November 10, 2008. Archived from the original on 2011-06-08 . Retrieved April 4, 2009 . ^ "Radical Gay Activist Group Plans More Disruptions". Chicago Tribune. November 20, 2008. Archived from the original on November 16, 2009. ^ Kaplan, Tracey (March 16, 2009). "Surge in anti-gay hate crime cases". San Jose Mercury News . Retrieved March 16, 2009 . ^ DiCamillo, Mark (November 10, 2008). "Why Prop. 8 confounded pre-election pollsters". San Francisco Chronicle . Retrieved November 12, 2008 . ^ "Proposition 8, on Marriage, Still in Doubt". SurveyUSA. November 1, 2008 . Retrieved November 2, 2008 . ^ Wildermuth, John (October 22, 2008). "Prop. 8 still trails, but margin narrows". The Field Poll . Retrieved October 23, 2008 . ^ "Californians & Their Government '-- PPIC Survey". Public Policy Institute of California. October 22, 2008 . Retrieved October 23, 2008 . ^ "California Prop 8 Remains a Fierce Fight That Could Be Decided Either Way By Handful of Votes". SurveyUSA. October 17, 2008 . Retrieved October 17, 2008 . ^ "Young Voters Lead Prop 8 Support Shift". CBS 5 local. October 6, 2008. Archived from the original on October 7, 2008 . Retrieved October 7, 2008 . ^ "California Proposition 8 Too Close To Call". SurveyUSA. October 6, 2008 . Retrieved October 7, 2008 . ^ "Action News poll". ABC 30 local. September 26, 2008. Archived from the original on June 4, 2011 . Retrieved September 26, 2008 . ^ "California Proposition 8 Could Go Either Way". SurveyUSA. September 25, 2008 . Retrieved September 26, 2008 . ^ Wildermuth, John (September 25, 2008). "Poll: Same-sex marriage ban not wooing voters". San Francisco Chronicle. p. B2. ^ Sturrock, Carrie (September 18, 2008). "Opposition to same-sex marriage ban grows". San Francisco Chronicle . Retrieved October 23, 2008 . ^ Garrison, Jessica (August 27, 2008). "Most oppose bid to ban gay marriage in California, poll finds". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved August 30, 2008 . ^ "Californians & their government". Public Policy Institute of California. August 27, 2008 . Retrieved March 12, 2021 . ^ "Release #2278" (PDF) . The Field Poll. July 18, 2008. Archived from the original (PDF) on October 29, 2008 . Retrieved October 22, 2008 . ^ "Field Poll: Majority of Californians now support gay marriage". Sacramento Bee. May 28, 2008. Archived from the original on May 29, 2008 . Retrieved August 1, 2008 . ^ Decker, Cathleen (May 23, 2008). "Times Poll: Californians narrowly reject gay marriage". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved August 1, 2008 . ^ a b "Article 18 Amending and Revising the Constitution". Legislative Counsel of California. Archived from the original on December 10, 2008 . Retrieved November 26, 2008 . ^ "CNN 2008 Exit Polls, Page 1" . Retrieved November 13, 2008 . ^ "CNN 2008 Exit Polls, Page 2" . Retrieved November 13, 2008 . ^ "Exit Poll Shows Blacks, Hispanics Overwhelmingly Backed Prop. 8". KTVU. November 5, 2008. Archived from the original on September 17, 2012 . Retrieved March 29, 2012 . ^ Morain, Dan; Garrison, Jessica (2008-11-06). "Focused beyond marriage". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved 2013-11-01 . ^ "70% of African Americans backed Prop. 8, exit poll finds - latimes.com". Latimesblogs.latimes.com. 2008-11-05 . Retrieved 2013-11-01 . ^ "Local Exit Polls'--Election Center 2008'--Elections & Politics from". CNN.com . Retrieved 2013-11-01 . ^ "California's Prop 8" (PDF) . Archived from the original (PDF) on 2010-01-07 . Retrieved 2009-12-22 . ^ Wildermuth, John (January 7, 2009). "Black support for Prop 8 called exaggeration". The San Francisco Chronicle. ^ Karl Vick; Ashley Surdin (7 November 2008). "Most of California's Black Voters Backed Gay Marriage Ban". The Washington Post. District of Columbia . Retrieved 11 April 2017 . Marcus Wohlsen (6 November 2008). "Blacks, Latinos helped Prop. 8, exit polls say". San Diego Union-Tribune. San Diego. Associated Press. Archived from the original on 12 April 2017 . Retrieved 11 April 2017 . Patrick J. Egan; Kenneth Sherrill (January 2010). "California's Proposition 8 and America's Racial and Ethnic Divides on Same'Sex Marriage" (PDF) . The Wilf Family Department of Politics. New York University . Retrieved 11 April 2017 . ^ Ridley, John (February 9, 2009). "Faith, Not Race, The Big Factor in Prop 8 Vote". Huffpost . Retrieved March 12, 2021 . ^ "Local Exit Polls'--Election Center 2008'--Elections & Politics from". CNN.com . Retrieved 2013-11-01 . ^ "California's Proposition 8: What Happened, and What Does the Future Hold?" (PDF) . Archived from the original (PDF) on 2010-01-07 . Retrieved 2013-11-01 . ^ "L.A. Jews overwhelmingly opposed Prop. 8, exit poll finds - latimes.com". Latimesblogs.latimes.com. 2008-11-09 . Retrieved 2013-11-01 . ^ Sacbee.com, California election exit poll data. Retrieved August 20, 2009 Archived November 8, 2008, at the Wayback Machine ^ "Statement on Proposition 8 Passing by Ron Prentice, Chairman of ProtectMarriage.com". ProtectMarriage.com. November 4, 2008. Archived from the original on November 9, 2008 . Retrieved November 14, 2008 . ^ "Final Statement from No on Prop 8 Campaign". No On 8, Equality for All. November 6, 2008 . Retrieved November 6, 2008 . ^ "Same-Sex Couple Tries To Marry, Turned Away". KCRA.com. November 5, 2008. Archived from the original on February 22, 2012 . Retrieved November 5, 2008 . ^ Emanuella Grinberg (November 5, 2008). "Los Angeles stops issuing marriage licenses to gay couples". CNN. Archived from the original on March 4, 2016 . Retrieved March 29, 2009 . ^ Jenny Shearer (November 5, 2008). "County clerk: No more marriage licenses will be issued to same-sex couples". Bakersfield Californian. Archived from the original on March 4, 2016 . Retrieved March 29, 2009 . ^ "Voters Approve Gay Marriage Bans in California, Arizona, Florida". The Baltimore Sun. November 6, 2008 . Retrieved March 12, 2021 . ^ Garrison, Jessica; Lin, Joanne (November 6, 2008). "Prop. 8 protesters target Mormon temple in Westwood". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved November 6, 2008 . ^ "Gay Marriage Ban Protests In LA". Sky News. November 6, 2008. Archived from the original on February 14, 2009 . Retrieved November 6, 2008 . ^ Garza, Samantha (November 6, 2008). "Sacramento rally protests Proposition 8". The Sacramento Bee. Archived from the original on December 11, 2008 . Retrieved November 6, 2008 . ^ "Thousands Attend Vigil Protesting Passage Of Prop. 8". KTVU. November 6, 2008. Archived from the original on November 9, 2008 . Retrieved November 6, 2008 . ^ ^ Garrison, Jessica & Lin, Joanne (2008-11-06). "Prop. 8 protesters target Mormon temple in Westwood". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved 2008-11-06 . ^ "Gay Marriage Ban Protests In LA". Sky News. 2008-11-06 . Retrieved 2008-11-06 . ^ Garza, Samantha (2008-11-06). "Sacramento rally protests Proposition 8". The Sacramento Bee. Archived from the original on December 11, 2008 . Retrieved 2008-11-06 . ^ "Protests Against Gay-Marriage Ban Continue". KCRA.com. Archived from the original on 2012-03-06 . Retrieved 2008-11-17 . ^ "Thousands Attend Vigil Protesting Passage Of Prop. 8". KTVU. 2008-11-06. Archived from the original on 2008-11-09 . Retrieved 2008-11-06 . ^ Brent Hunsaker & Kerry Kinsey (2008-11-07). "Same-sex marriage protest held near LDS Temple Square". abc4.com. Archived from the original on 2011-08-10 . Retrieved 2009-03-20 . ^ Jared Page & Clayton Norlen (2008-11-08). "Prop. 8 protest draws thousands in Salt Lake City". The Deseret News . Retrieved 2008-11-11 . ^ "New Yorkers Protest Gay Marriage Ban Outside Mormon Church". Foxnews.com. 2008-11-13. Archived from the original on 2012-10-25 . Retrieved 2013-12-02 . ^ McKINLEY, JESSE (November 15, 2008). "Across U.S., Big Rallies for Same-Sex Marriage". The New York Times. ^ Anderson, Mark (2008-11-11). "Report: Musical Theatre board cancels emergency meeting over Prop. 8 support". American City Business Journals . Retrieved 2008-11-11 . ^ "Prop. 8 gift gets theater's leader in a ruckus". sacbe.com. Archived from the original on February 14, 2009 . Retrieved 2008-11-11 . ^ "Prop. 8 repercussions hit Sacramento theater". Los Angeles times. 2008-11-11 . Retrieved 2008-11-11 . ^ Crowder, Marcus (2008-11-13). "Theater exec Eckern, caught in Prop. 8 flap, resigns". The Sacramento Bee. Archived from the original on 2009-02-15. ^ Abramowitz, Rachel (2008-11-25). "L.A. Film Festival director Richard Raddon resigns". Los Angeles Times. ^ Stateman, Alison (2008-11-15). "What Happens If You're on Gay Rights' 'Enemies List' ". Time.com. Time Inc. Archived from the original on November 27, 2008 . Retrieved 2009-07-19 . ^ "Lawmaker: Don't Blame Blacks for Proposition 8". CNN. June 12, 2009 . Retrieved March 12, 2021 . ^ "Prop 8 '-- The Musical". ^ "Gay marriage a gift to California's economy", Los Angeles Times, LATimes.com, June 2, 2008 ^ Itzkoff, Dave. "Marc Shaiman on 'Prop 8 '-- The Musical'", The New York Times, December 4, 2008 ^ "Star-studded Web video protests Prop 8 '' Spoof musical's blockbuster cast includes Jack Black as Jesus", Associated Press, MSN.com, December 4, 2008 ^ "Webby Nominees: 13th Annual Webby Awards Nominees & Winners". The Webby Awards . Retrieved 2013-03-19 . ^ "Shaiman's 'PROP 8-THE MUSICAL' Wins GLAAD Award Honors". Broadway World. 2009-04-21 . Retrieved 2009-04-25 . ^ "LDS Church donates to pro-Prop. 8 group". Deseret News. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 2008-10-29 . Retrieved 2009-02-07 . ^ McKinley, Jesse (2008-11-25). "Inquiry Set on Mormon Aid for California Marriage Vote". The New York Times . Retrieved 2008-11-26 . ^ "Prop 8 foes file complaint against LDS". Deseret News. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 2008-11-14 . Retrieved 2009-02-07 . ^ The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (2009-01-30). "Campaign Finance Summary Information". California Secretary of State . Retrieved 2009-02-07 . ^ Wildermuth, John (2009-01-31). "Mormon church reports $190,000 Prop. 8 expenses". San Francisco Chronicle . Retrieved 2009-04-03 . ^ "Mormon church reveals deeper involvement in California's Proposition 8". Boston Herald. 2 February 2009. Archived from the original on February 14, 2009 . Retrieved 2009-02-08 . ^ "Church Clarifies Proposition 8 Filing, Corrects Erroneous News Reports". LDS Church. 2 February 2009 . Retrieved 2009-02-04 . ^ "Calif.'s Prop. 8 Supporters Want Donors Anonymous". cbs5.com. 2009-01-09. Archived from the original on February 4, 2009 . Retrieved 2009-03-28 . ^ Lawrence, Steve (2009-01-29). "Judge: Anti-gay marriage donors must be public". Associated Press. Archived from the original on February 15, 2009 . Retrieved 2009-01-29 . ^ "California Supreme Court Takes Action on Proposition 8" (PDF) . Judicial Council of California. 2008-11-19 . Retrieved 2008-11-19 . ^ "Ruling in Strauss, et al. v. Horton and related cases, nos. S168047, S168066, S168078, California Supreme Court, May 26, 2009" (PDF) . Archived from the original (PDF) on 2009-05-28 . Retrieved 2013-12-02 . ^ a b George, Ronald M. (2009-05-26). "Strauss v. Horton". California Supreme Court. Archived from the original (PDF) on May 28, 2009 . Retrieved 2009-05-26 . ^ Robertson, Kathy (2009-10-12). "California to recognize some out-of-state gay marriages". Sacramento Biz Journal . Retrieved 2009-10-12 . ^ "Smelt v United States". Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse . Retrieved March 12, 2021 . ^ Deutsch, Linda (2009-06-12). "DOJ moves to dismiss first fed gay marriage case". Associated Press . Retrieved 2009-06-12 . ^ "Order in Smelt v USA" (PDF) . Retrieved 2009-07-18 . ^ Egelko, Bob (2009-06-23). "Gay couple's weapon in lawsuit: Obama's words". San Francisco Chronicle . Retrieved 2009-06-23 . ^ "US judge nixes suit that split Obama, gays". Associated Press. 2009-08-24 . Retrieved 2009-08-24 . ^ The Associated Press (June 26, 2009). "Groups Back Federal Challenge to Gay Marriage Ban". The San Diego Union-Tribune . Retrieved March 12, 2021 . ^ "San Francisco Moves to Intervene in Federal Challenge to Proposition 8". San Francisco City Attorney's Office. 2009-07-23. Archived from the original on 2012-05-05 . Retrieved 2009-07-23 . ^ Dolan, Mora & Williams, Carol J. (2009-06-13). "Jerry Brown again says Prop. 8 should be struck down". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved 2009-06-18 . ^ Egelko, Bob (2009-08-19). "Judge sets January trial for Prop. 8 lawsuit". San Francisco Chronicle . Retrieved 2009-08-19 . ^ Egelko, Bob (2009-06-17). "Governor backs federal review of Prop. 8". San Francisco Chronicle . Retrieved 2009-06-18 . ^ "Hollingswork v. Perry". Cornell Law School . Retrieved September 15, 2021 . ^ Laird, Cynthia (2009-06-18). "Brown still fighting Prop 8". Bay Area Reporter . Retrieved 2009-06-23 . ^ "Live from San Francisco". Archived from the original on December 8, 2010. ^ "Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage". CNN. 2010-08-05. ^ McKinley, Jesse (2010-08-12). "Judge Sets End to Ban on Gay Marriage in California". New York Times . Retrieved 12 August 2010 . ^ Reuters (17 August 2010). "California gay marriages on hold again". Australian Broadcasting Corporation . Retrieved 17 August 2010 . ^ "L.A. Now". LA Times. 2010-11-17 . Retrieved 2010-11-18 . ^ "2009 Ballot Measure Update". California Secretary of State. Archived from the original on 2008-06-05 . Retrieved 2009-06-18 . ^ "California Marriage Equality Act" (PDF) . California Secretary of State. 2009-05-30. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2009-07-10 . Retrieved 2009-06-18 . ^ Henderson, Peter (2010-04-12). "Gay marriage fails to get on California ballot". Reuters. ^ Dolan, Maura (2010-04-13). "Prop. 8 repeal fails to qualify for November ballot". Los Angeles Times. ^ "Prepare to Prevail" (PDF) . PreparetoPrevail.com. July 13, 2009. ^ Garofoli, Joe (2009-07-17). "Coalition of LGBT groups: Next year too soon for gay marriage vote in CA". San Francisco Chronicle . Retrieved 2009-07-17 . ^ "California Supreme Court Takes Action on Proposition 8" (PDF) . Judicial Council of California. November 19, 2008 . Retrieved November 19, 2008 . ^ "Perry v Schwarzeneggar (pg 113''114)" . Retrieved February 8, 2012 . ^ "Perry v Schwarzeneggar (pp. 119''122)" . Retrieved February 8, 2012 . ^ McKinley, Jesse (August 12, 2010). "Judge Sets End to Ban on Gay Marriage in California". The New York Times . Retrieved August 12, 2010 . ^ "Final Stay Order". scribd.com . Retrieved August 12, 2010 . ^ Reuters (August 17, 2010). "California gay marriages on hold again". Australian Broadcasting Corporation . Retrieved August 17, 2010 . ^ Wisckol, Martin (January 4, 2011). "Prop. 8 gay marriage ruling hits detour". Ocregister.com . Retrieved October 31, 2011 . ^ "California Supreme Court to decide issue in same-sex marriage ban case". CNN. February 16, 2011 . Retrieved February 16, 2011 . ^ Dolan, Maura (February 17, 2011). "California Supreme Court reenters Proposition 8 fray". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved February 27, 2011 . ^ Andy Towle (September 7, 2011). "Yesterday's Hearing On Standing In The Prop 8 Case: Full Video, Reactions". ^ Ariane de Vogue (November 17, 2011). "Prop 8: California Supreme Court Rules Sponsors Can Continue Case". ABC News. ^ Perry v Brown (California Supreme Court 11/17/11).Text ^ "Perry v Brown (pg 5)" . Retrieved February 8, 2012 . ^ "Perry v Brown (pg 79''80)" . Retrieved February 8, 2012 . ^ "Perry v Brown (pg 77)" . Retrieved February 8, 2012 . ^ "Perry v Brown (pg 69)" . Retrieved February 8, 2012 . ^ "Perry v Brown (pg 63)" . Retrieved February 8, 2012 . ^ "Court: Calif. gay-marriage ban unconstitutional". CBS News. CBS/AP. February 7, 2012 . Retrieved February 8, 2012 . ^ a b c "Dissenting Prop. 8 judge says 'optimal partnership' is man, woman". Latimesblogs.latimes.com. 2012-02-07 . Retrieved 2013-12-03 . ^ Jamison, Peter (2012-02-07). "Prop. 8 Appeals Court Ruling: Inside the Dissenting Opinion". Blogs.sfweekly.com . Retrieved 2013-12-03 . ^ a b Dolan, Maura (February 22, 2012). "Prop. 8 backers seek full review by appeals court". LA Times . Retrieved February 29, 2012 . ^ McVeigh, Karen (February 7, 2012). "Prop 8: California gay marriage ban struck down by federal appeals court". The Guardian. London . Retrieved February 8, 2012 . ^ "California's Proposition 8 case headed to U.S. Supreme Court". Mercurynews.com. 2012-06-05 . Retrieved November 15, 2012 . ^ Denniston, Lyle (July 31, 2012). " "Proposition 8" defenders' appeal filed (FINAL UPDATE)". SCOTUSblog . Retrieved August 3, 2012 . ^ a b Hollingsworth v. Perry, no. 12-144, (docket). Retrieved September 7, 2012. ^ The Ticket (2012-12-07). "Supreme Court will hear two gay marriage cases | The Ticket". Yahoo! News . Retrieved 2013-11-01 . ^ supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders (access date: 2013-11-01) ^ "Understanding standing: The Court's Article III questions in the same-sex marriage cases (I)". SCOTUSblog. 2013-01-17 . Retrieved 2013-11-01 . ^ a b Clarke, Rachel (June 26, 2013). "Supreme Court strikes down part of DOMA, dismisses Prop. 8 appeal". CNN . Retrieved June 26, 2013 . ^ "Strange bedfellows: The rationale of the Prop 8 dissenters". The Week. 2013-06-26 . Retrieved 2013-11-01 . ^ Winter, Michael (June 28, 2013). "Same-sex marriages resume in Calif.: San Francisco plaintiffs in Prop. 8 ruling are first couple to wed after appellate action". USA Today . Retrieved June 28, 2013 . ^ "Emergency stay of California same-sex marriages sought", SCOTUSblog, June 29, 2013 ^ "New gay marriage challenge fails", SCOTUSblog, June 30, 2013. ^ a b Goodbye and good riddance to Prop. 8'--Los Angeles Times, editorial, June 27, 2013 ^ a b Prop. 8 backers ask court to stop weddings SFGate, 2013-07-12, by Bob Egelko. ^ Same-sex marriage foes file suit in clerk's name'--SFGate 2013-07-19, by Bob Egelko. ^ 24 Calif. county clerks back same-sex marriages'--SFGate, 2013-07-22, by Bob Egelko. ^ Dolan, Maura (July 15, 2013). "California Supreme Court rejects bid to halt same-sex marriages". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved July 17, 2013 . ^ Dolan, Maura (August 14, 2013). "California Supreme Court rejects bid to revive Prop. 8". LA Times. External links The District Court's decision in Perry v Schwarzenegger (Prop 8 Unconstitutional)The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Decision Affirming Perry v Schwarzenegger (Prop 8 Unconstitutional)Video'--Ninth Circuit Appeals Court Trial on the MeritsVideo'--Ninth Circuit Appeals Court Trial on RecusalProtectMarriage.com: Organizational sponsor of Proposition 8No On Prop. 8: Organizational opponent to Proposition 8California Official Voter Information Guide on Proposition 8, Title and summary, analysis, arguments and rebuttals, and the text of the proposition.Scan of Initiative from California Attorney General websiteThe Money Behind the 2008 Same-Sex Partnership Ballot Measures'--OpenSecretsProposition 8 map a detailed hyper-linked map on David Leips election atlas.Hollingsworth v. Perry at SCOTUSblogAmicus briefs filed in Hollingsworth v. Perry from the City Attorney of San FranciscoU.S. same-sex unions ballot measures
1990s2000sCalifornia Proposition 22 (2000, ban)Nebraska Initiative 416 (2000, ban)Nevada Question 2 (2002, ban)Arkansas Constitutional Amendment 3 (2004, ban)Georgia Constitutional Amendment 1 (2004, ban)Kentucky Constitutional Amendment 1 (2004, ban)Louisiana Constitutional Amendment 1 (2004, ban)Michigan Proposal 04-2 (2004, ban)Mississippi Amendment 1 (2004, ban)Missouri Constitutional Amendment 2 (2004, ban)Montana Initiative 96 (2004, ban)North Dakota Constitutional Measure 1 (2004, ban)Ohio Issue 1 (2004, ban)Oklahoma Question 711 (2004, ban)Oregon Ballot Measure 36 (2004, ban)Utah Constitutional Amendment 3 (2004, ban)Kansas Amendment 1 (2005)Texas Proposition 2 (2005, ban)Alabama Amendment 774 (2006)Arizona Proposition 107 (2006, constitutional ban defeated)Colorado Amendment 43 (2006, ban)Idaho Amendment 2 (2006)South Carolina Amendment 1 (2006, ban)South Dakota Amendment C (2006)Tennessee Amendment 1 (2006, ban)Marshall-Newman Amendment (Virginia) (2006, ban)Wisconsin Referendum 1 (2006, ban)Arizona Proposition 102 (2008, ban)California Proposition 8 (2008, ban)Florida Amendment 2 (2008, ban)Maine Question 1 (2009, legalizing legislation defeated)2010s2020sFebruary primary electionJune primary electionNovember general electionPresidentialUnited States House of RepresentativesState SenateState AssemblyPropositions: 1A, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12Special electionsLocal elections
Don't ask, don't tell - Wikipedia
Wed, 29 Jun 2022 19:39
Former policy on gay people serving in the US military
Don't ask, don't tellPresident Bill Clinton announcing new policy regarding homosexuals in the military in July 1993
PlannedDepartment of Defense Directive 1304.26Planned byClinton administrationDateFebruary 28, 1994 '' September 20, 2011Executed byLes AspinOutcomeService by gays, bisexuals, and lesbians in the military"Don't ask, don't tell" (DADT) was the official United States policy on military service by gay men, bisexuals, and lesbians, instituted during the Clinton administration. The policy was issued under Department of Defense Directive 1304.26 on December 21, 1993, and was in effect from February 28, 1994, until September 20, 2011.[1] The policy prohibited military personnel from discriminating against or harassing closeted homosexual or bisexual service members or applicants, while barring openly gay, lesbian, or bisexual persons from military service. This relaxation of legal restrictions on service by gays and lesbians in the armed forces was mandated by United States federal law Pub.L. 103''160 (10 U.S.C. § 654), which was signed November 30, 1993.[2] The policy prohibited people who "demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts" from serving in the armed forces of the United States, because their presence "would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability".[3]
The act prohibited any homosexual male, lesbian, or bisexual from disclosing their sexual orientation or from speaking about any same-sex relationships, including marriages or other familial attributes, while serving in the United States armed forces. The act specified that service members who disclose that they are homosexual or engage in homosexual conduct should be separated (discharged) except when a service member's conduct was "for the purpose of avoiding or terminating military service" or when it "would not be in the best interest of the armed forces".[4] Since DADT ended in 2011, persons who are openly homosexual and bisexual have been able to serve.[5]
The "don't ask" part of the DADT policy specified that superiors should not initiate an investigation of a service member's orientation without witnessing disallowed behaviors. However, evidence of homosexual behavior deemed credible could be used to initiate an investigation. Unauthorized investigations and harassment of suspected servicemen and women led to an expansion of the policy to "don't ask, don't tell, don't pursue, don't harass".[6]
Beginning in the early 2000s, several legal challenges to DADT were filed, and legislation to repeal DADT was enacted in December 2010, specifying that the policy would remain in place until the President, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff certified that repeal would not harm military readiness, followed by a 60-day waiting period.[7] A July 6, 2011, ruling from a federal appeals court barred further enforcement of the U.S. military's ban on openly gay service members.[8] President Barack Obama, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen sent that certification to Congress on July 22, 2011, which set the end of DADT to September 20, 2011.[9] Although DADT was officially repealed, the legal definition of marriage as being one man and one woman under the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) meant that, although same-sex partners could get married, their marriage was not recognized by the federal government. This barred partners from access to the same benefits afforded to heterosexual couples such as base access, health care, and United States military pay, including family separation allowance and Basic Allowance for Housing with dependents.[10] The Department of Defense attempted to open some of the benefits that were not restricted by DOMA,[11] but the Supreme Court decision in United States v. Windsor made these efforts unnecessary.[12]
Background [ edit ] Dignity and Respect, the U.S. Army's 2001 training guide on the homosexual conduct policy, gave official guidelines on what can be considered credible information of someone's homosexuality or bisexuality.
Engaging in homosexual activity had been grounds for discharge from the American military since the Revolutionary War. Policies based on sexual orientation appeared as the United States prepared to enter World War II. When the military added psychiatric screening to its induction process, it included homosexuality as a disqualifying trait, then seen as a form of psychopathology. When the army issued revised mobilization regulations in 1942, it distinguished "homosexual" recruits from "normal" recruits for the first time.[13] Before the buildup to the war, gay service members were court-martialed, imprisoned, and dishonorably discharged; but in wartime, commanding officers found it difficult to convene court-martial boards of commissioned officers and the administrative blue discharge became the military's standard method for handling gay and lesbian personnel. In 1944, a new policy directive decreed that homosexuals were to be committed to military hospitals, examined by psychiatrists, and discharged under Regulation 615''360, section 8.[14]
In 1947, blue discharges were discontinued and two new classifications were created: "general" and "undesirable". Under such a system, a serviceman or woman found to be gay but who had not committed any sexual acts while in service would tend to receive an undesirable discharge. Those found guilty of engaging in sexual conduct were usually dishonorably discharged.[15] A 1957 U.S. Navy study known as the Crittenden Report dismissed the charge that homosexuals constitute a security risk, but nonetheless did not advocate for an end to anti-gay discrimination in the navy on the basis that "The service should not move ahead of civilian society nor attempt to set substantially different standards in attitude or action with respect to homosexual offenders." It remained secret until 1976.[16] Fannie Mae Clackum was the first service member to successfully appeal such a discharge, winning eight years of back pay from the US Court of Claims in 1960.[17]
From the 1950s through the Vietnam War, some notable gay service members avoided discharges despite pre-screening efforts, and when personnel shortages occurred, homosexuals were allowed to serve.[18]
The gay and lesbian rights movement in the 1970s and 1980s raised the issue by publicizing several noteworthy dismissals of gay service members. Air Force TSgt Leonard Matlovich, the first service member to purposely out himself to challenge the ban, appeared on the cover of Time in 1975.[19] In 1982 the Department of Defense issued a policy stating that, "Homosexuality is incompatible with military service." It cited the military's need "to maintain discipline, good order, and morale" and "to prevent breaches of security".[20] In 1988, in response to a campaign against lesbians at the Marines' Parris Island Depot, activists launched the Gay and Lesbian Military Freedom Project (MFP) to advocate for an end to the exclusion of gays and lesbians from the armed forces.[21] In 1989, reports commissioned by the Personnel Security Research and Education Center (PERSEREC), an arm of the Pentagon, were discovered in the process of Joseph Steffan's lawsuit fighting his forced resignation from the U.S. Naval Academy. One report said that "having a same-gender or an opposite-gender orientation is unrelated to job performance in the same way as is being left- or right-handed."[22] Other lawsuits fighting discharges highlighted the service record of service members like Tracy Thorne and Margarethe (Grethe) Cammermeyer. The MFP began lobbying Congress in 1990, and in 1991 Senator Brock Adams (D-Washington) and Rep. Barbara Boxer introduced the Military Freedom Act, legislation to end the ban completely. Adams and Rep. Pat Schroeder (D-Colorado) re-introduced it the next year.[23] In July 1991, Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney, in the context of the outing of his press aide Pete Williams, dismissed the idea that gays posed a security risk as "a bit of an old chestnut" in testimony before the House Budget Committee.[24] In response to his comment, several major newspapers endorsed ending the ban, including USA Today, the Los Angeles Times, and the Detroit Free Press.[25] In June 1992, the General Accounting Office released a report that members of Congress had requested two years earlier estimating the costs associated with the ban on gays and lesbians in the military at $27 million annually.[26]
During the 1992 U.S. presidential election campaign, the civil rights of gays and lesbians, particularly their open service in the military, attracted some press attention,[27] and all candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination supported ending the ban on military service by gays and lesbians,[28] but the Republicans did not make a political issue of that position.[29] In an August cover letter to all his senior officers, General Carl Mundy Jr., Commandant of the Marine Corps, praised a position paper authored by a Marine Corps chaplain that said that "In the unique, intensely close environment of the military, homosexual conduct can threaten the lives, including the physical (e.g. AIDS) and psychological well-being of others". Mundy called it "extremely insightful" and said it offered "a sound basis for discussion of the issue".[30] The murder of gay U.S. Navy petty officer Allen R. Schindler Jr. on October 27, 1992, brought calls from advocates of allowing open service by gays and lesbians for prompt action from the incoming Clinton administration.[31]
Origin [ edit ] The policy was introduced as a compromise measure in 1993 by President Bill Clinton who campaigned in 1992 on the promise to allow all citizens to serve in the military regardless of sexual orientation.[32] Commander Craig Quigley, a Navy spokesman, expressed the opposition of many in the military at the time when he said, "Homosexuals are notoriously promiscuous" and that in shared shower situations, heterosexuals would have an "uncomfortable feeling of someone watching".[33]
During the 1993 policy debate, the National Defense Research Institute prepared a study for the Office of the Secretary of Defense published as Sexual Orientation and U.S. Military Personnel Policy: Options and Assessment. It concluded that "circumstances could exist under which the ban on homosexuals could be lifted with little or no adverse consequences for recruitment and retention" if the policy were implemented with care, principally because many factors contribute to individual enlistment and re-enlistment decisions.[34] On May 5, 1993, Gregory M. Herek, associate research psychologist at the University of California at Davis and an authority on public attitudes toward lesbians and gay men, testified before the House Armed Services Committee on behalf of several professional associations. He stated, "The research data show that there is nothing about lesbians and gay men that makes them inherently unfit for military service, and there is nothing about heterosexuals that makes them inherently unable to work and live with gay people in close quarters." Herek added, "The assumption that heterosexuals cannot overcome their prejudices toward gay people is a mistaken one."[35]
In Congress, Democratic Senator Sam Nunn of Georgia and Chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee led the contingent that favored maintaining the absolute ban on gays. Reformers were led by Democratic Congressman Barney Frank of Massachusetts, who favored modification (but ultimately voted for the defense authorization bill with the gay ban language), and Barry Goldwater, a former Republican Senator and a retired Major General,[36] who argued on behalf of allowing service by open gays and lesbians but was not allowed to appear before the Committee by Nunn. In a June 1993 Washington Post opinion piece, Goldwater wrote: "You don't have to be straight to shoot straight".[37]
Congress rushed to enact the existing gay ban policy into federal law, outflanking Clinton's planned repeal effort. Clinton called for legislation to overturn the ban, but encountered intense opposition from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, members of Congress, and portions of the public. DADT emerged as a compromise policy.[38] Congress included text in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (passed in 1993) requiring the military to abide by regulations essentially identical to the 1982 absolute ban policy.[39] The Clinton administration on December 21, 1993,[40] issued Defense Directive 1304.26, which directed that military applicants were not to be asked about their sexual orientation.[39] This policy is now known as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell". The phrase was coined by Charles Moskos, a military sociologist.
In accordance with the December 21, 1993, Department of Defense Directive 1332.14,[41] it was legal policy (10 U.S.C. § 654)[42] that homosexuality was incompatible with military service and that persons who engaged in homosexual acts or stated that they are homosexual or bisexual were to be discharged.[32][39] The Uniform Code of Military Justice, passed by Congress in 1950 and signed by President Harry S Truman, established the policies and procedures for discharging service members.[43]
The full name of the policy at the time was "Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Pursue". The "Don't Ask" provision mandated that military or appointed officials not ask about or require members to reveal their sexual orientation. The "Don't Tell" stated that a member may be discharged for claiming to be a homosexual or bisexual or making a statement indicating a tendency towards or intent to engage in homosexual activities. The "Don't Pursue" established what was minimally required for an investigation to be initiated. A "Don't Harass" provision was added to the policy later. It ensured that the military would not allow harassment or violence against service members for any reason.[38]
The Servicemembers Legal Defense Network was founded in 1993 to advocate an end to discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in the U.S. Armed Forces.[44]
Court challenges [ edit ] DADT was upheld by five federal Courts of Appeal.[45] The Supreme Court, in Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights, Inc. (2006), unanimously held that the federal government could constitutionally withhold funding from universities, no matter what their nondiscrimination policies might be, for refusing to give military recruiters access to school resources. An association of law schools had argued that allowing military recruiting at their institutions compromised their ability to exercise their free speech rights in opposition to discrimination based on sexual orientation as represented by DADT.[46]
McVeigh v. Cohen [ edit ] In January 1998, Senior Chief Petty Officer Timothy R. McVeigh (not to be confused with convicted Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy J. McVeigh) won a preliminary injunction from a U.S. district court that prevented his discharge from the U.S. Navy for "homosexual conduct" after 17 years of service. His lawsuit did not challenge the DADT policy but asked the court to hold the military accountable for adhering to the policy's particulars. The Navy had investigated McVeigh's sexual orientation based on his AOL email account name and user profile. District Judge Stanley Sporkin ruled in McVeigh v. Cohen that the Navy had violated its own DADT guidelines: "Suggestions of sexual orientation in a private, anonymous email account did not give the Navy a sufficient reason to investigate to determine whether to commence discharge proceedings."[47] He called the Navy's investigation "a search and destroy mission" against McVeigh. The case also attracted attention because a navy paralegal had misrepresented himself when querying AOL for information about McVeigh's account. Frank Rich linked the two issues: "McVeigh is as clear-cut a victim of a witch hunt as could be imagined, and that witch hunt could expand exponentially if the military wants to add on-line fishing to its invasion of service members' privacy."[48] AOL apologized to McVeigh and paid him damages. McVeigh reached a settlement with the Navy that paid his legal expenses and allowed him to retire with full benefits in July. The New York Times called Sporkin's ruling "a victory for gay rights, with implications for the millions of people who use computer on-line services".[49]
Witt v. Department of the Air Force [ edit ] In April 2006, Margaret Witt, a major in the United States Air Force who was being investigated for homosexuality, filed suit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington seeking declaratory and injunctive relief on the grounds that DADT violates substantive due process, the Equal Protection Clause, and procedural due process. In July 2007 the Secretary of the Air Force ordered her honorable discharge. Dismissed by the district court, the case was heard on appeal, and the Ninth Circuit issued its ruling on May 21, 2008. Its decision in Witt v. Department of the Air Force reinstated Witt's substantive-due-process and procedural-due-process claims and affirmed the dismissal of her Equal Protection claim. The Ninth Circuit, analyzing the Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas (2003), determined that DADT had to be subjected to heightened scrutiny, meaning that there must be an "important" governmental interest at issue, that DADT must "significantly" further the governmental interest, and that there can be no less intrusive way for the government to advance that interest.
The Obama administration declined to appeal, allowing a May 3, 2009, deadline to pass, leaving Witt as binding on the entire Ninth Circuit, and returning the case to the District Court.[50] On September 24, 2010, District Judge Ronald B. Leighton ruled that Witt's constitutional rights had been violated by her discharge and that she must be reinstated to the Air Force.[51]
The government filed an appeal with the Ninth Circuit on November 23, but did not attempt to have the trial court's ruling stayed pending the outcome.[52] In a settlement announced on May 10, 2011, the Air Force agreed to drop its appeal and remove Witt's discharge from her military record. She will retire with full benefits.[53]
Log Cabin Republicans v. United States of America [ edit ] In 2010, a lawsuit filed in 2004 by the Log Cabin Republicans (LCR), the nation's largest Republican gay organization, went to trial.[54] Challenging the constitutionality of DADT, the plaintiffs stated that the policy violates the rights of gay military members to free speech, due process and open association. The government argued that DADT was necessary to advance a legitimate governmental interest.[55] Plaintiffs introduced statements by President Barack Obama, from prepared remarks, that DADT "doesn't contribute to our national security", "weakens our national security", and that reversal is "essential for our national security". According to plaintiffs, these statements alone satisfied their burden of proof on the due process claims.[56]
On September 9, 2010, Judge Virginia A. Phillips ruled in Log Cabin Republicans v. United States of America that the ban on service by openly gay service members was an unconstitutional violation of the First and Fifth Amendments.[57][58] On October 12, 2010, she granted an immediate worldwide injunction prohibiting the Department of Defense from enforcing the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy and ordered the military to suspend and discontinue any investigation or discharge, separation, or other proceedings based on it.[59][60] The Department of Justice appealed her decision and requested a stay of her injunction,[61] which Phillips denied but which the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted on October 20[62][63]and stayed pending appeal on November 1.[64] The U.S. Supreme Court refused to overrule the stay.[65]District Court neither anticipated questions ofconstitutional law nor formulated a rule broader than is required by the facts. Theconstitutional issues regarding DADT are well-defined, and the District Courtfocused specifically on the relevant inquiry of whether the statute impermissiblyinfringed upon substantive due process rights with regard to a protected area ofindividual liberty. Engaging in a careful and detailed review of the facts presentedto it at trial, the District Court properly concluded that the Government put forwardno persuasive evidence to demonstrate that the statute is a valid exercise ofcongressional authority to legislate in the realm of protected liberty interests. SeeLog Cabin, 716 F. Supp. 2d at 923. Hypothetical questions were neither presentednor answered in reaching this decision.On October 19, 2010, military recruiters were told they could accept openly gay applicants.[66] On October 20, 2010, Lt. Daniel Choi, an openly gay man honorably discharged under DADT, re-enlisted in the U.S. Army.[67]
Following the passage of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010, the Justice Department asked the Ninth Circuit to suspend LCR's suit in light of the legislative repeal. LCR opposed the request, noting that gay personnel were still subject to discharge. On January 28, 2011, the Court denied the Justice Department's request.[68] The Obama administration responded by requesting that the policy be allowed to stay in place while they completed the process of assuring that its end would not impact combat readiness. On March 28, the LCR filed a brief asking that the court deny the administration's request.[69]
In 2011, while waiting for certification, several service members were discharged under DADT at their own insistence,[70] until July 6 when a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals re-instated Judge Phillips' injunction barring further enforcement of the U.S. military's ban on openly gay service members.[71] On July 11, the appeals court asked the DOJ to inform the court if it intended to proceed with its appeal.[72] On July 14, the Justice Department filed a motion "to avoid short-circuiting the repeal process established by Congress during the final stages of the implementation of the repeal".[73] and warning of "significant immediate harms on the government". On July 15, the Ninth Circuit restored most of the DADT policy,[73] but continued to prohibit the government from discharging or investigating openly gay personnel. Following the implementation of DADT's repeal, a panel of three judges of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the Phillips ruling.[74]
Debate [ edit ] General
Norton A. Schwartz, chief of staff of the United States Air Force, testifies on the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" before the Senate Armed Services Committee on December 3, 2010.
Following the July 1999 murder of Army Pfc. Barry Winchell, apparently motivated by anti-gay bias, President Clinton issued an executive order modifying the Uniform Code of Military Justice to permit evidence of a hate crime to be admitted during the sentencing phase of a trial.[75][76] In December, Secretary of Defense William Cohen ordered a review of DADT to determine if the policy's anti-gay harassment component was being observed.[77] When that review found anti-gay sentiments were widely expressed and tolerated in the military, the DOD adopted a new anti-harassment policy in July 2000, though its effectiveness was disputed.[75] On December 7, 1999, Hillary Clinton told an audience of gay supporters that "Gays and lesbians already serve with distinction in our nation's armed forces and should not face discrimination. Fitness to serve should be based on an individual's conduct, not their sexual orientation."[78] Later that month, retired General Carl E. Mundy Jr. defended the implementation of DADT against what he called the "politicization" of the issue by both Clintons. He cited discharge statistics for the Marines for the past five years that showed 75% were based on "voluntary admission of homosexuality" and 49% occurred during the first six months of service, when new recruits were most likely to reevaluate their decision to enlist. He also argued against any change in the policy, writing in the New York Times: "Conduct that is widely rejected by a majority of Americans can undermine the trust that is essential to creating and maintaining the sense of unity that is critical to the success of a military organization operating under the very different and difficult demands of combat."[79] The conviction of Winchell's murderer, according to the New York Times, "galvanized opposition" to DADT, an issue that had "largely vanished from public debate". Opponents of the policy focused on punishing harassment in the military rather than the policy itself, which Senator Chuck Hagel defended on December 25: "The U.S. armed forces aren't some social experiment."[80]
The principal candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2000, Al Gore and Bill Bradley, both endorsed military service by open gays and lesbians, provoking opposition from high-ranking retired military officers, notably the recently retired commandant of the Marine Corps, General Charles C. Krulak. He and others objected to Gore's statement that he would use support for ending DADT as a "litmus test" when considering candidates for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.[81] The 2000 Democratic Party platform was silent on the issue,[82] while the Republican Party platform that year said: "We affirm that homosexuality is incompatible with military service."[83] Following the election of George W. Bush in 2000, observers expected him to avoid any changes to DADT, since his nominee for Secretary of State Colin Powell had participated in its creation.[84]
In February 2004, members of the British Armed Forces, Lt Rolf Kurth and Lt Cdr Craig Jones, along with Aaron Belkin, Director of the Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military met with members of Congress and spoke at the National Defense University. They spoke about their experience of the current situation in the UK. The UK lifted the gay ban on members serving in their forces in 2000.[85][86]
In July 2004, the American Psychological Association issued a statement that DADT "discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation" and that "Empirical evidence fails to show that sexual orientation is germane to any aspect of military effectiveness including unit cohesion, morale, recruitment and retention." It said that the U.S. military's track record overcoming past racial and gender discrimination demonstrated its ability to integrate groups previously excluded.[87] The Republican Party platform that year reiterated its support for the policy'--"We affirm traditional military culture, and we affirm that homosexuality is incompatible with military service."[88]'--while the Democratic Party maintained its silence.[89]
In February 2005, the Government Accountability Office released estimates of the cost of DADT. It reported at least $95.4 million in recruiting costs and at least $95.1 million for training replacements for the 9,488 troops discharged from 1994 through 2003, while noting that the true figures might be higher.[90] In September, as part of its campaign to demonstrate that the military allowed open homosexuals to serve when its workforce requirements were greatest, the Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military (now the Palm Center) reported that army regulations allowed the active-duty deployment of Army Reservists and National Guard troops who claim to be or who are accused of being gay. A U.S. Army Forces Command spokesperson said the regulation was intended to prevent Reservists and National Guard members from pretending to be gay to escape combat.[91][92] Advocates of ending DADT repeatedly publicized discharges of highly trained gay and lesbian personnel,[93] especially those in positions with critical shortages, including fifty-nine Arabic speakers and nine Persian speakers.[94][95] Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness, later argued that the military's failure to ask about sexual orientation at recruitment was the cause of the discharges: [Y]ou could reduce this number to zero or near zero if the Department of Defense dropped Don't Ask, Don't Tell. ... We should not be training people who are not eligible to be in the Armed Forces."[96]
In February 2006, a University of California Blue Ribbon Commission that included Lawrence Korb, a former assistant defense secretary during the Reagan administration, William Perry, Secretary of Defense in the Clinton administration, and professors from the United States Military Academy released their assessment of the GAO's analysis of the cost of DADT released a year earlier. The commission report stated that the GAO did not take into account the value the military lost from the departures. They said that that total cost was closer to $363 million, including $14.3 million for "separation travel" following a service member's discharge, $17.8 million for training officers, $252.4 million for training enlistees, and $79.3 million in recruiting costs.[90]
In 2006, Soulforce, a national LGBT rights organization, organized its Right to Serve Campaign, in which gay men and lesbians in several cities attempted to enlist in the Armed Forces or National Guard.[97] Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness stated in September: "I think the people involved here do not have the best interests of the military at heart. They never have. They are promoting an agenda to normalize homosexuality in America using the military as a battering ram to promote that broader agenda." She said that "pro-homosexual activists ... are creating media events all over the country and even internationally."[98]
In 2006, a speaking tour of gay former service members, organized by SLDN, Log Cabin Republicans, and Meehan, visited 18 colleges and universities. Patrick Guerriero, executive director of Log Cabin, thought the repeal movement was gaining "new traction" but "Ultimately", said, "we think it's going to take a Republican with strong military credentials to make a shift in the policy." Elaine Donnelly called such efforts "a big P.R. campaign" and said that "The law is there to protect good order and discipline in the military, and it's not going to change."[99]
In December 2006, Zogby International released the results of a poll of military personnel conducted in October 2006 that found that 26% favored allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military, 37% were opposed, while 37% expressed no preference or were unsure. Of respondents who had experience with gay people in their unit, 6% said their presence had a positive impact on their personal morale, 66% said no impact, and 28% said negative impact. Regarding overall unit morale, 3% said positive impact, 64% no impact, and 27% negative impact.[100]
Retired Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General John Shalikashvili[101] and former Senator and Secretary of Defense William Cohen[102] opposed the policy in January 2007: "I now believe that if gay men and lesbians served openly in the United States military, they would not undermine the efficacy of the armed forces" Shalikashvili wrote. "Our military has been stretched thin by our deployments in the Middle East, and we must welcome the service of any American who is willing and able to do the job."[103] Shalikashvili cited the recent "Zogby poll of more than 500 service members returning from Afghanistan and Iraq, three-quarters of whom said they were comfortable interacting with gay people.[104] The debate took a different turn in March when General Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the editorial board of the Chicago Tribune he supported DADT because "homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral and ... we should not condone immoral acts."[105] His remarks became, according to the Tribune, "a huge news story on radio, television and the Internet during the day and showed how sensitive the Pentagon's policy has become."[106] Senator John Warner, who backed DADT, said "I respectfully, but strongly, disagree with the chairman's view that homosexuality is immoral", and Pace expressed regret for expressing his personal views and said that DADT "does not make a judgment about the morality of individual acts."[107] Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, then in the early stages of his campaign for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination, defended DADT:[108]
When I first heard [the phrase], I thought it sounded silly and I just dismissed it and said, well, that can't possibly work. Well, I sure was wrong. It has worked. It's been in place now for over a decade. The military says it's working and they don't want to change it ... and they're the people closest to the front. We're in the middle of a conflict right now. I would not change it.
That summer, after U.S. senator Larry Craig was arrested for lewd conduct in a men's restroom, conservative commentator Michael Medved argued that any liberalization of DADT would "compromise restroom integrity and security". He wrote: "The national shudder of discomfort and queasiness associated with any introduction of homosexual eroticism into public men's rooms should make us more determined than ever to resist the injection of those lurid attitudes into the even more explosive situation of the U.S. military."[109]
In November 2007, 28 retired generals and admirals urged Congress to repeal the policy, citing evidence that 65,000 gay men and women were serving in the armed forces and that there were over a million gay veterans.[103][110] On November 17, 2008, 104 retired generals and admirals signed a similar statement.[110] In December, SLDN arranged for 60 Minutes to interview Darren Manzella, an Army medic who served in Iraq after coming out to his unit.[111]
On May 4, 2008, while Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen addressed the graduating cadets at West Point, a cadet asked what would happen if the next administration were supportive of legislation allowing gays to serve openly. Mullen responded, "Congress, and not the military, is responsible for DADT." Previously, during his Senate confirmation hearing in 2007, Mullen told lawmakers, "I really think it is for the American people to come forward, really through this body, to both debate that policy and make changes, if that's appropriate." He went on to say, "I'd love to have Congress make its own decisions" with respect to considering repeal.[112]
In May 2009, when a committee of military law experts at the Palm Center, an anti-DADT research institute, concluded that the President could issue an Executive Order to suspend homosexual conduct discharges,[113] Obama rejected that option and said he wanted Congress to change the law.[114]
On July 5, 2009, Colin Powell told CNN that the policy was "correct for the time" but that "sixteen years have now gone by, and I think a lot has changed with respect to attitudes within our country, and therefore I think this is a policy and a law that should be reviewed." Interviewed for the same broadcast, Mullen said the policy would continue to be implemented until the law was repealed, and that his advice was to "move in a measured way. ... At a time when we're fighting two conflicts there is a great deal of pressure on our forces and their families."[115] In September, Joint Force Quarterly published an article by an Air Force colonel[116] that disputed the argument that unit cohesion is compromised by the presence of openly gay personnel.[117]
In October 2009, the Commission on Military Justice, known as the Cox Commission, repeated its 2001 recommendation that Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which bans sodomy, be repealed, noting that "most acts of consensual sodomy committed by consenting military personnel are not prosecuted, creating a perception that prosecution of this sexual behavior is arbitrary."[118]
In January 2010, the White House and congressional officials started work on repealing the ban by inserting language into the 2011 defense authorization bill.[119] During Obama's State of the Union Address on January 27, 2010, he said that he would work with Congress and the military to enact a repeal of the gay ban law and for the first time set a timetable for repeal.[120]
At a February 2, 2010, congressional hearing, Senator John McCain read from a letter signed by "over one thousand former general and flag officers". It said: "We firmly believe that this law, which Congress passed to protect good order, discipline and morale in the unique environment of the armed forces, deserves continued support."[121] The signature campaign had been organized by Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness, a longtime supporter of a traditional all-male and all-heterosexual military.[122] Servicemembers United, a veterans group opposed to DADT, issued a report critical of the letter's legitimacy. They said that among those signing the letter were officers who had no knowledge of their inclusion or who had refused to be included, and even one instance of a general's widow who signed her husband's name to the letter though he had died before the survey was published. The average age of the officers whose names were listed as signing the letter was 74, the oldest was 98, and Servicemembers United noted that "only a small fraction of these officers have even served in the military during the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' period, much less in the 21st century military."[123]
The Center for American Progress issued a report in March 2010 that said a smooth implementation of an end to DADT required eight specified changes to the military's internal regulations.[124] On March 25, 2010, Defense Secretary Gates announced new rules mandating that only flag officers could initiate discharge proceedings and imposing more stringent rules of evidence on discharge proceedings.[125]
Repeal [ edit ] The underlying justifications for DADT had been subjected to increasing suspicion and outright rejection by the early 21st century. Mounting evidence obtained from the integration efforts of foreign militaries, surveys of U.S. military personnel, and studies conducted by the DoD gave credence to the view that the presence of open homosexuals within the military would not be detrimental at all to the armed forces. A DoD study conducted at the behest of Secretary of Defense Robert Gates in 2010 supports this most.
The DoD working group conducting the study considered the impact that lifting the ban would have on unit cohesion and effectiveness, good order and discipline, and military morale. The study included a survey that revealed significant differences between respondents who believed they had served with homosexual troops and those who did not believe they had. In analyzing such data, the DoD working group concluded that it was actually generalized perceptions of homosexual troops that led to the perceived unrest that would occur without DADT. Ultimately, the study deemed the overall risk to military effectiveness of lifting the ban to be low. Citing the ability of the armed forces to adjust to the previous integration of African-Americans and women, the DoD study asserted that the United States military could adjust as had it before in history without an impending serious effect.[126]
In March 2005, Rep. Martin T. Meehan introduced the Military Readiness Enhancement Act in the House. It aimed "to amend title 10, United States Code, to enhance the readiness of the Armed Forces by replacing the current policy concerning homosexuality in the Armed Forces, referred to as 'Don't ask, don't tell,' with a policy of nondiscrimination on the basis of sexual orientation".[127] As of 2006, it had 105 Democrats and 4 Republicans as co-sponsors.[99] He introduced the bill again in 2007 and 2009.
During the 2008 U.S. presidential election campaign, Senator Barack Obama advocated a full repeal of the laws barring gays and lesbians from serving in the military.[128] Nineteen days after his election, Obama's advisers announced that plans to repeal the policy might be delayed until 2010, because Obama "first wants to confer with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and his new political appointees at the Pentagon to reach a consensus, and then present legislation to Congress".[129] As president he advocated a policy change to allow gay personnel to serve openly in the armed forces, stating that the U.S. government has spent millions of dollars replacing troops expelled from the military, including language experts fluent in Arabic, because of DADT.[130] On the eve of the National Equality March in Washington, D.C., October 10, 2009, Obama stated in a speech before the Human Rights Campaign that he would end the ban, but he offered no timetable.[131][132] Obama said in his 2010 State of the Union Address: "This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are."[133] This statement was quickly followed up by Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs chairman Michael Mullen voicing their support for a repeal of DADT.[134]
Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010 [ edit ] The Senate passed S.4023 65''31 with all Democrats (except for one abstention) and 8 Republicans in support.
Both yes
One yes, one did not vote
One yes, one no
One no, one did not vote
Both no
Democrats in both houses of Congress first attempted to end DADT by amending the Defense Authorization Act. On May 27, 2010, on a 234''194 vote,[135] the U.S. House of Representatives approved the Murphy amendment[136] to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011. It provided for repeal of the DADT policy and created a process for lifting the policy, including a U.S. Department of Defense study and certification by key officials that the change in policy would not harm military readiness followed by a waiting period of 60 days.[137][138] The amended defense bill passed the House on May 28, 2010.[139] On September 21, 2010, John McCain led a successful filibuster against the debate on the Defense Authorization Act, in which 56 Senators voted to end debate, four short of the 60 votes required.[140] Some advocates for repeal, including the Palm Center, OutServe, and Knights Out, opposed any attempt to block the passage of NDAA if it failed to include DADT repeal language. The Human Rights Campaign, the Center for American Progress, Servicemembers United and SLDN refused to concede that possibility.[141]
President Obama meeting in the Oval Office with Secretary Gates, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Commandant of the Coast Guard on the eve of the publication of a DoD report on the repeal of DADT.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit, Collins v. United States, against the Department of Defense in November 2010 seeking full compensation for those discharged under the policy.[142]
On November 30, 2010, the Joint Chiefs of Staff released the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Comprehensive Review Working Group (CRWG) report authored by Jeh C. Johnson, General Counsel of the Department of Defense, and Army General Carter F. Ham.[143][144] It outlined a path to the implementation of repeal of DADT.[145] The report indicated that there was a low risk of service disruptions due to repealing the ban, provided time was provided for proper implementation and training.[143][146] It included the results of a survey of 115,000 active-duty and reserve service members. Across all service branches, 30 percent thought that integrating gays into the military would have negative consequences. In the Marine Corps and combat specialties, the percentage with that negative assessment ranged from 40 to 60 percent. The CRWG also said that 69 percent of all those surveyed believed they had already worked with a gay or lesbian and of those, 92 percent reported that the impact of that person's presence was positive or neutral.[145][146] The same day, in response to the CRWG, 30 professors and scholars, most from military institutions, issued a joint statement saying that the CRWG "echoes more than 20 studies, including studies by military researchers, all of which reach the same conclusion: allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly will not harm the military ... We hope that our collective statement underscores that the debate about the evidence is now officially over".[147] The Family Research Council's president, Tony Perkins, interpreted the CRWG data differently, writing that it "reveals that 40 percent of Marines and 25 percent of the Army could leave".[148]
Gates encouraged Congress to act quickly to repeal the law so that the military could carefully adjust rather than face a court decision requiring it to lift the policy immediately.[146] The United States Senate held two days of hearings on December 2 and 3, 2010, to consider the CRWG report. Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Joint Chiefs chairman Michael Mullen urged immediate repeal.[149] The heads of the Marine Corps, Army, and Navy all advised against immediate repeal and expressed varied views on its eventual repeal.[150] Oliver North, writing in National Review the next week, said that Gates' testimony showed "a deeply misguided commitment to political correctness". He interpreted the CRWG's data as indicating a high risk that large numbers of resignations would follow the repeal of DADT. Service members, especially combat troops, he wrote, "deserve better than to be treated like lab rats in Mr. Obama's radical social experiment".[151]
On December 9, 2010, another filibuster prevented debate on the Defense Authorization Act.[152] In response to that vote, Senators Joe Lieberman and Susan Collins introduced a bill that included the policy-related portions of the Defense Authorization Act that they considered more likely to pass as a stand-alone bill.[153] It passed the House on a vote of 250 to 175 on December 15, 2010.[154] On December 18, 2010, the Senate voted to end debate on its version of the bill by a cloture vote of 63''33.[155] The final Senate vote was held later that same day, with the measure passing by a vote of 65''31.[156]
U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates released a statement following the vote indicating that the planning for implementation of a policy repeal would begin right away and would continue until Gates certified that conditions were met for orderly repeal of the policy.[157] President Obama signed the repeal into law on December 22, 2010.[7]
Implementation of repeal [ edit ] The repeal act established a process for ending the DADT policy. The President, the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff were required to certify in writing that they had reviewed the Pentagon's report on the effects of DADT repeal, that the appropriate regulations had been reviewed and drafted, and that implementation of repeal regulations "is consistent with the standards of military readiness, military effectiveness, unit cohesion, and recruiting and retention of the Armed Forces". Once certification was given, DADT would be lifted after a 60-day waiting period.[158]
Representative Duncan D. Hunter announced plans in January 2011 to introduce a bill designed to delay the end of DADT. His proposed legislation required all of the chiefs of the armed services to submit the certification at the time required only of the President, Defense Secretary and Joint Chiefs chairman.[159] In April, Perkins of the Family Research Council argued that the Pentagon was misrepresenting its own survey data and that hearings by the House Armed Services Committee, now under Republican control, could persuade Obama to withhold certification.[160] Congressional efforts to prevent the change in policy from going into effect continued into May and June 2011.[161]
On January 29, 2011, Pentagon officials stated that the training process to prepare troops for the end of DADT would begin in February and would proceed quickly, though they suggested that it might not be completed in 2011.[162] On the same day, the DOD announced it would not offer any additional compensation to service members who had been discharged under DADT, who received half of the separation pay other honorably discharged service members received.[163]
In May 2011, the U.S. Army reprimanded three colonels for performing a skit in March 2011 at a function at Yongsan Garrison, South Korea, that mocked the repeal.[164]
In May 2011, revelations that an April Navy memo relating to its DADT training guidelines contemplated allowing same-sex weddings in base chapels and allowing chaplains to officiate if they so chose resulted in a letter of protest from 63 Republican congressman, citing the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) as controlling the use of federal property.[165] Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council said the guidelines "make it even more uncomfortable for men and women of faith to perform their duties".[166] A Pentagon spokesperson replied that DOMA "does not limit the type of religious ceremonies a chaplain may perform in a chapel on a military installation", and a Navy spokesperson said that "A chaplain can conduct a same-sex ceremony if it is in the tenets of his faith".[167] A few days later the Navy rescinded its earlier instructions "pending additional legal and policy review and interdepartmental coordination".[168]
While waiting for certification, several service members were discharged at their own insistence[70] until a July 6 ruling from a federal appeals court barred further enforcement of the U.S. military's ban on openly gay service members,[8] which the military promptly did.[169]
Anticipating the lifting of DADT, some active duty service members wearing civilian clothes marched in San Diego's gay pride parade on July 16. The DOD noted that participation "does not constitute a declaration of sexual orientation".[170]
President Obama, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, and Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, sent the certification required by the Repeal Act to Congress on July 22, 2011, setting the end of DADT for September 20, 2011.[171] A Pentagon spokesman said that service members discharged under DADT would be able to re-apply to rejoin the military then.[172]
At the end of August 2011, the DOD approved the distribution of the magazine produced by OutServe, an organization of gay and lesbian service members, at Army and Air Force base exchanges beginning with the September 20 issue, coinciding with the end of DADT.[173]
On September 20, Air force officials announced that 22 Air Force Instructions were "updated as a result of the repeal of DADT".[174] On September 30, 2011, the Department of Defense modified regulations to reflect the repeal by deleting "homosexual conduct" as a ground for administrative separation.[175][176]
Day of repeal and aftermath [ edit ] US Navy LT
Gary C. Ross marries Dan Swezy, becoming the first active member of the U.S. military to legally marry a same-sex partner.
On the eve of repeal, US Air Force 1st Lt. Josh Seefried, one of the founders of OutServe, an organization of LGBT troops, revealed his identity after two years of hiding behind a pseudonym.[177] Senior Airman Randy Phillips, after conducting a social media campaign seeking encouragement coming out and already out to his military co-workers, came out to his father on the evening of September 19. When the video of their conversation he posted on YouTube went viral, it made him, in one journalist's estimation, "the poster boy for the DADT repeal".[178] The moment the repeal took effect at midnight on September 19, US Navy Lt. Gary C. Ross married his same-sex partner of eleven and a half years, Dan Swezy, making them the first same-sex military couple to legally marry in the United States.[179] Retired Rear Adm. Alan M. Steinman became the highest-ranking person to come out immediately following the end of DADT.[180] HBO produced a World of Wonder documentary, The Strange History of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, and premiered it on September 20. Variety called it "an unapologetic piece of liberal advocacy" and "a testament to what formidable opponents ignorance and prejudice can be".[181] Discharge proceedings on the grounds of homosexuality, some begun years earlier, came to an end.[182]
In the weeks that followed, a series of firsts attracted press attention to the impact of the repeal. The Marine Corps were the first branch of the armed services to recruit from the LGBTQ community. Reservist Jeremy Johnson became the first person discharged under DADT to re-enlist.[184] Jase Daniels became the first to return to active duty, re-joining the Navy as a third class petty officer.[185] On December 2, Air Force intelligence officer Ginger Wallace became the first open LGBT service member to have a same-sex partner participate in the "pinning-on" ceremony that marked her promotion to colonel.[186] On December 23, after 80 days at sea, US Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class Marissa Gaeta won the right to the traditional "first kiss" upon returning to port and shared it with her same-sex partner.[citation needed ] On January 20, 2012, U.S. service members deployed to Bagram, Afghanistan, produced a video in support of the It Gets Better Project, which aims to support LGBT at-risk youth.[187] Widespread news coverage continued even months after the repeal date, when a photograph of Marine Sgt. Brandon Morgan kissing his partner at a February 22, 2012, homecoming celebration on Marine Corps Base Hawaii went viral.[188] When asked for a comment, a spokesperson for the Marine Corps said: "It's your typical homecoming photo."[189]
Petty Officer 2nd Class Marissa Gaeta of the
USS Oak Hill (LSD-51) shares the traditional "first kiss" with her fianc(C)e, Petty Officer 3rd Class Citlalic Snell, December 23, 2011.
On September 30, 2011, Under Secretary of Defense Clifford Stanley announced the DOD's policy that military chaplains are allowed to perform same-sex marriages "on or off a military installation" where local law permits them. His memo noted that "a chaplain is not required to participate in or officiate a private ceremony if doing so would be in variance with the tenets of his or her religion" and "a military chaplain's participation in a private ceremony does not constitute an endorsement of the ceremony by DoD".[190] Some religious groups announced that their chaplains would not participate in such weddings, including an organization of evangelical Protestants, the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty[191] and Roman Catholics led by Archbishop Timothy Broglio of the Archdiocese for the Military Services, USA.[192]
In late October 2011, speaking at the Air Force Academy, Colonel Gary Packard, leader of the team that drafted the DOD's repeal implementation plan, said: "The best quote I've heard so far is, 'Well, some people's Facebook status changed, but that was about it. ' "[193] In late November, discussing the repeal of DADT and its implementation, Marine General James F. Amos said "I'm very pleased with how it has gone" and called it a "non-event". He said his earlier public opposition was appropriate based on ongoing combat operations and the negative assessment of the policy given by 56% of combat troops under his command in the Department of Defense's November 2010 survey. A Defense Department spokesperson said implementation of repeal occurred without incident and added: "We attribute this success to our comprehensive pre-repeal training program, combined with the continued close monitoring and enforcement of standards by our military leaders at all levels."[194]
In December 2011, Congress considered two DADT-related amendments in the course of work on the National Defense Authorization Act for 2012. The Senate approved 97''3, an amendment removing the prohibition on sodomy found in Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice as recommended by the Comprehensive Review Working Group (CRWG) a year earlier.[195][196] The House approved an amendment banning same-sex marriages from being performed at military bases or by military employees, including chaplains and other employees of the military when "acting in an official capacity". Neither amendment appeared in the final legislation.[195]
In July 2012, the Department of Defense granted permission for military personnel to wear their uniforms while participating in the San Diego Pride Parade. This was the first time that U.S. military personnel were permitted to wear their service uniforms in such a parade.[197]
Marking the first anniversary of the passage of the Repeal Act, television news networks reported no incidents in the three months since DADT ended. One aired video of a social gathering for gay service members at a base in Afghanistan.[198] Another reported on the experience of lesbian and gay troops, including some rejection after coming out to colleagues.[199]
The Palm Center, a think tank that studies issues of sexuality and the military, released a study in September 2012 that found no negative consequences, nor any effect on military effectiveness from DADT repeal. This study began six months following repeal and concluded at the one year mark. The study included surveys of 553 generals and admirals who had opposed repeal, experts who supported DADT, and more than 60 heterosexual, gay, lesbian and bisexual active duty service personnel.[200][201]
On January 7, 2013, the ACLU reached a settlement with the federal government in Collins v. United States. It provided for the payment of full separation pay to service members discharged under DADT since November 10, 2004, who had previously been granted only half that.[202]
2012 presidential campaign issue [ edit ] Several candidates for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination called for the restoration of DADT, including Michele Bachmann,[203] Rick Perry,[204] and Rick Santorum.[205] Newt Gingrich called for an extensive review of DADT's repeal.[206]
Ron Paul, having voted for the Repeal Act, maintained his support for allowing military service by open homosexuals.[207] Herman Cain called the issue "a distraction" and opposed reinstating DADT.[208] Mitt Romney said that the winding down of military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan obviated his opposition to the repeal and said he was not proposing any change to policy.[209]
On September 22, 2011, the audience at a Republican candidates' debate booed a U.S. soldier posted in Iraq who asked a question via video about the repeal of DADT, and none of the candidates noticed or responded to the crowd's behavior.[210] Two days later, Obama commented on the incident while addressing a dinner of the Human Rights Campaign: "You want to be commander in chief? You can start by standing up for the men and women who wear the uniform of the United States, even when it's not politically convenient".[211]
In June 2012, Rep. Howard McKeon, Republican chair of the House Armed Services Committee, said he considered the repeal of DADT a settled issue and if Romney became president would not advocate its reinstatement, though others in his party might.[212]
2021 benefits restoration [ edit ] In September 2021, on the 10th anniversary of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal, President Joe Biden announced that the Veterans Administration would start providing benefits for servicemembers who received other-than-honorable discharges (before DADT was enacted and while it was in effect) because of their sexual orientation.[213]
Views of the policy [ edit ] Public opinion [ edit ] Protest in New York by
Soulforce, a civil rights group.
In 1993, Time reported that 44% of those polled supported openly gay servicemembers,[214] and in 1994, a CNN poll indicated 53% of Americans believed gays and lesbians should be permitted to serve openly.[215]
According to a December 2010 The Washington Post-ABC News poll 77% of Americans said gays and lesbians who publicly disclose their sexual orientation should be able to serve in the military. That number showed little change from polls over the previous two years, but represented the highest level of support in a Post-ABC poll. The support also cut across partisan and ideological lines, with majorities of Democrats (86%), Republicans (74%), independents (74%), liberals (92%), conservatives (67%), white evangelical Protestants (70%) and non-religious (84%) in favor of homosexuals serving openly.[216]
A November 2010 survey by the Pew Research Center found that 58% of the U.S. public favored allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military, while less than half as many (27%) were opposed.[217] According to a November 2010 CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll, 72% of adult Americans favored permitting people who are openly gay or lesbian to serve in the military, while 23% opposed it.[218] "The main difference between the CNN poll and the Pew poll is in the number of respondents who told pollsters that they didn't have an opinion on this topic '' 16 percent in the Pew poll compared to only five percent in the CNN survey", said CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "The two polls report virtually the same number who say they oppose gays serving openly in the military, which suggests that there are some people who favor that change in policy but for some reason were reluctant to admit that to the Pew interviewers. That happens occasionally on topics where moral issues and equal-treatment issues intersect."[219]
A February 2010 Quinnipiac University Polling Institute national poll showed 57% of American voters favored gays serving openly, compared to 36% opposed, while 66% said not allowing openly gay personnel to serve is discrimination, compared to 31% who did not see it as discrimination.[220] A CBS News/The New York Times national poll done at the same time showed 58% of Americans favored gays serving openly, compared to 28% opposed.[221]
Chaplains and religious groups [ edit ] Chaplain groups and religious organizations took various positions on DADT. Some felt that the policy needed to be withdrawn to make the military more inclusive. The Southern Baptist Convention battled the repeal of DADT, warning that their endorsements for chaplains might be withdrawn if the repeal took place.[222][223] They took the position that allowing gay men and women to serve in the military without restriction would have a negative impact on the ability of chaplains who think homosexuality is a sin to speak freely regarding their religious beliefs. The Roman Catholic Church called for the retention of the policy, but had no plans to withdraw its priests from serving as military chaplains.[224] Sixty-five retired chaplains signed a letter opposing repeal, stating that repeal would make it impossible for chaplains whose faith teaches that same-sex behavior is immoral to minister to military service members.[225] Other religious organizations and agencies called the repeal of the policy a "non-event" or "non-issue" for chaplains, claiming that chaplains have always supported military service personnel, whether or not they agree with all their actions or beliefs.[226][227][228]
Discharges under DADT [ edit ] After the policy was introduced in 1993, the military discharged over 13,000 troops from the military under DADT.[110][229][230] The number of discharges per fiscal year under DADT dropped sharply after the September 11 attacks and remained comparatively low through to the repeal. Discharges exceeded 600 every year until 2009.
YearCoast GuardMarinesNavyArmyAir ForceTotal1994[231]0362581361876171995[231]15692691842357721996[231]12603151992848701997[231]10784131973091,0071998[231]14773453124151,1631999[231]12973142713521,0462000[231][232]191143585731771,2412001[231][232]141153146482171,2732002[231][232]291092184291219062003[231]''''''''''7872004[233]1559177325926682005[233]1675177386887422006[231]''''''''''6232007[231]''''''''''6272008[234]''''''''''6192009''''''''''4282010[235]11''''''''261Total'‰¥156'‰¥889'‰¥3,158'‰¥3,650'‰¥2,47713,650Disclaimer: These statistics are not official, and only include soldiers who came forward to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network. Because some soldiers do not disclose their discharge, some of the numbers may be inaccurate.Rear Adm. Vic Guillory, commander of U.S. Naval Forces Southern Command and U.S. 4th Fleet leads DADT repeal training for Tier 2 command leadership at Naval Station Mayport, March 17, 2011
Naval Special Warfare Command personnel watching Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead during DADT repeal training, April 6, 2011
DADT Repeal training for enlisted, officer and civilian staff at Naval Medical Center San Diego, May 5, 2011
State-based gay and lesbian military veteran laws [ edit ] In November 2019, both Rhode Island and New York State signed into law and implemented restoring military benefits to gay and lesbian military veterans. An estimated approximately 100,000 individuals were affected by the "don't ask don't tell policy" (since it was repealed in September 2011).[236]
See also [ edit ] Liberal homophobiaSteve May, gay Republican Arizona legislator, Army reservist until May 2001Sexual orientation and gender identity in the United States militarySexual orientation and military service '' for information on policies in military services worldwideReferences [ edit ] Citations [ edit ] ^ "Department of Defense Directive 1304.26" . Retrieved September 11, 2013 . ^ "Gays in the Military" . Retrieved September 11, 2013 . ^ 10 U.S.C. § 654(b) ^ 10 U.S.C. § 654(e) ^ "Army Regulation 40-501, Standards of Medical Fitness, Chapters 2-27n and 3''35" (PDF) . Archived from the original (PDF) on February 1, 2017 . Retrieved December 21, 2013 . ^ "The Legal Brief "Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Pursue, Don't Harass: Reference (a): Personnel Manual, COMDTINST M1000.6, Ch. 12.E" " (PDF) . United States Coast Guard Ninth District Legal Office. May 2010. Archived from the original (PDF) on September 29, 2011 . Retrieved October 23, 2010 . ^ a b Sheryl Gay Stolberg (December 22, 2010). "Obama Signs Away 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' ". The New York Times. Archived from the original on January 1, 2022 . Retrieved December 22, 2010 . ^ a b "In reversal, federal court orders immediate end to 'don't ask, don't tell' policy". The Washington Post. Associated Press. July 6, 2011. Archived from the original on December 6, 2018 . Retrieved July 6, 2011 . ^ "Obama certifies end of military's gay ban". NBC News. Reuters. July 22, 2011 . Retrieved July 22, 2011 . ^ "Extending Benefits to Same-Sex Domestic Partners of Military Members" (PDF) . GlobalSecurity.org. February 11, 2013. ^ "DD Form X653". reginfo.gov. August 20, 2013. ^ "DoD Announces Extension of Equal Benefits for Same-Sex Military Spouses". AMPA The American Military Partner Association. August 14, 2013. ^ B(C)rub(C), Coming Out Under Fire, 9''14, 19 ^ B(C)rub(C), Coming Out Under Fire, 142''3 ^ Jones, p. 3 ^ E. Lawrence Gibson, Get Off my Ship : Ensign Berg vs. the U.S. Navy (NY: Avon, 1978), 256''67 ^ Lillian Faderman (1991). Odd Girls and Twilight Lovers: A History of Lesbian Life in Twentieth-Century America. New York: Penguin. p. 155. ISBN 978-0-14-017122-8. ^ Lillian Faderman (1991). Odd Girls and Twilight Lovers: A History of Lesbian Life in Twentieth-Century America. New York: Penguin. pp. 119''138. ISBN 978-0-14-017122-8. ^ "The Sexes: The Sergeant v. the Air Force". Time. September 8, 1975. Retrieved July 26, 2011. Other prominent cases included Copy Berg, Stephen Donaldson. ^ Fordham University: "Homosexuals in the Armed Forces: United States GAO Report", June 12, 1992. Retrieved February 27, 2012. ^ Vaid, Virtual Equality, 155-8 ^ Nathaniel Frank, Unfriendly Fire: How the Gay Ban Undermines the Military and Weakens America (NY: St. Martin's Press, 2009), 118''20; McFeeley, "Getting It Straight", 237-8 ^ McFeeley, "Getting It Straight", 238 ^ Stephen F. Hayes, Cheney: The Untold Story of America's Most Powerful and Controversial Vice President (NY: HarperCollins, 2007), 256 ^ Brian P. Mitchell, Women in the military: Flirting with Disaster (Washington: Regnery Publishing, 1998), 281 ^ McFeeley, "Getting It Straight", 237; Vaid, Virtual Equality, 158-9 ^ Schmalz, Jeffrey (August 20, 1992). "The Gay Vote; Gay Rights and AIDS Emerging As Divisive Issues in Campaign", The New York Times. Retrieved February 27, 2012. See also: Schmitt, Eric (August 26, 1992). "Marine Corps Chaplain Says Homosexuals Threaten Military", The New York Times: Retrieved February 27, 2012 ^ Vaid, Virtual Equality, 160 ^ McFeeley, "Getting It Straight", 239 ^ Schmitt, Eric (August 26, 1992). "Marine Corps Chaplain Says Homosexuals Threaten Military". The New York Times . Retrieved January 23, 2013 . ^ Reza, H.G. (January 9, 1993). "Homosexual Sailor Beaten to Death, Navy Confirms", Los Angeles Times. Retrieved February 14, 2012. ^ a b Shankar, Thom (November 30, 2007). "A New Push to Roll Back 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' ". The New York Times . Retrieved December 29, 2012 . ^ Schmitt, Eric (January 27, 1993). "Military Cites Wide Range of Reasons for Its Gay Ban". The New York Times . Retrieved June 9, 2011 . ^ National Defense Research Institute; Rand Corporation Rand Corporation (1993). Sexual orientation and U.S. military personnel policy: options and assessment. Santa Monica, Calif: Rand. p. 406. ISBN 978-0-8330-1441-2. ^ Gregory M. Herek: Oral Statement of Gregory M. Herek, PhD to the House Armed Services Committee Archived September 27, 2016, at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved February 24, 2012. The professional groups were the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the National Association of Social Workers, the American Counseling Association, the American Nursing Association, and the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States. ^ "Major General Barry M. Goldwater". US Air Force. Archived from the original on March 31, 2013. ^ Here Publishing (July 7, 1998). The Advocate. Here Publishing. p. 15. ^ a b "Lesbians and Gay Men in the U.S. Military: Historical Background". Psychology UC Davis . Retrieved March 16, 2021 . ^ a b c "Don't Ask Don't Tell Don't Pursue". Robert Crown Law Library. September 7, 1999. Archived from the original on April 25, 2012. ^ "Defense Directive 1304.26: Qualification Standards for Enlistment, Appointment, and Induction". Department of Defense. December 21, 1993. ^ "DoDD 1332.14, December 21, 1993". Stanford University. Archived from the original on July 4, 2010 . Retrieved December 19, 2010 . ^ "Title 10, Subtitle A, Part II, Chapter 37, § 654. Policy concerning homosexuality in the armed forces". Cornell Law School. June 9, 2010 . Retrieved December 19, 2010 . ^ Chuck Stewart (2001). Homosexuality and the law: a dictionary . Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO. pp. 196''7. ISBN 978-1-57607-267-7. ^ The New York Times: Eric Schmitt, "U.S. Agencies Split over Legal Tactics on Gay Troop Plan", December 19, 1993. Retrieved April 7, 2012. ^ Richenberg v. Perry, 97 F.3d 256 (8th Cir. 1996); Thomasson v. Perry, 80 F.3d 915 (4th Cir. 1996); Able v. United States, 155 F.3d 628 (2d Cir. 1998); Cook v. Gates, 528 F.3d 42 (1st Cir. 2008); Holmes v. California National Guard, 124 F.3d 1126 (9th Cir. 1998) ^ Mears, Bill (2006). "Justices uphold military recruiting on campuses". CNN . Retrieved March 6, 2006 . ^ Sporkin, Stanley (January 26, 1998). "Memorandum Opinion, Timothy R. McVeigh v. William S. Cohen, et al." (PDF) . U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia . Retrieved September 21, 2014 . ^ Rich, Frank (January 17, 1998). "The 2 Tim McVeighs". The New York Times . Retrieved September 21, 2014 . ^ Shenon, Philip (June 12, 1998). "Sailor Victorious in Gay Case of On-Line Privacy". The New York Times . Retrieved September 21, 2014 . ^ Bravin, Jess; Laura Meckler (May 19, 2009). "Obama Avoids Test on Gays in Military". The Wall Street Journal . Retrieved July 24, 2010 . ^ Johnson, Gene (September 24, 2010). "Judge orders lesbian reinstated to Air Force '' Case challenges 'Don't ask, don't tell' policy". NBC News. Associated Press . Retrieved September 24, 2010 . ^ "DOJ Appeals Lesbian's Reinstatement to Air Force". CBS News. November 24, 2010. Archived from the original on January 19, 2013 . Retrieved December 29, 2012 . ^ Seattle Post Intelligencer: Pulkkinnen, Levi (May 10, 2011). "Pentagon settles with McChord major fired for being lesbian". Retrieved May 12, 2011 ^ Garcia, Michelle (July 22, 2010). "Key DADT Repeal Advocate Testifies". Advocate.com. Archived from the original on July 24, 2010 . Retrieved July 22, 2010 . ^ Law.com: Constitutional Challenge to 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Reaches Trial ^ "In the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit" (PDF) . March 28, 2011 . Retrieved March 16, 2021 . ^ "US judge: 'Don't ask, don't tell' unconstitutional". Associated Press. September 10, 2010. ^ Phil Willon (September 9, 2010). "Judge declares U.S. military's 'don't ask, don't tell' policy openly banning gay service members unconstitutional". Los Angeles Times. ^ "Judge orders military to stop enforcing don't ask, don't tell". CNN. October 12, 2010 . Retrieved October 13, 2010 . ^ Schwartz, John (October 12, 2010). "Judge Orders U.S. Military to Stop 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' ". The New York Times . Retrieved December 29, 2012 . ^ "Justice department seeks stay of judge's 'don't-ask-don't-tell' ruling". CNN. October 15, 2010. ^ "Appeals court delays injunction against 'don't ask, don't tell' ". CNN. October 19, 2010 . Retrieved October 23, 2010 . ^ " 'Don't ask, don't tell' back in force after appeals court issues stay". The Christian Science Monitor. October 21, 2010. ^ John Schwartz (November 1, 2010). "Military Policy on Gays to Stand, Pending Appeal". The New York Times. Archived from the original on January 1, 2022 . Retrieved November 3, 2010 . ^ Ed O'Keefe (November 6, 2010). "Group asks high court to lift 'don't ask' ban". The Washington Post . Retrieved November 9, 2010 . ^ "Military recruiters told they can accept openly gay applicants". CNN. October 19, 2010. ^ " "Don't ask, don't tell" no longer enforced, Dan Choi reenlists". Salon. ^ The Advocate: "DADT Case Still Alive" Archived February 2, 2011, at the Wayback Machine, January 30, 2011. Retrieved February 14, 2012. ^ " 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' End Urged By Lawyers For Log Cabin Republicans". Huffington Post. March 28, 2011. ^ a b Harmon, Andrew (June 27, 2011). "Pentagon Confirms New DADT Discharges". The Advocate . Retrieved July 6, 2011 . ^ "Appeals court orders immediate halt to gay military ban". MSNBC. July 6, 2011 . Retrieved December 29, 2012 . ^ "9th Circuit orders gov't to state position on DADT". San Diego Union Tribune. July 11, 2011 . Retrieved December 29, 2012 . ^ a b Mohajer, Shaya Tayefe (July 15, 2011). "Court: 'don't ask, don't tell' will stay in place". ABC News. Associated Press . Retrieved March 16, 2021 . ^ Gerstein, Josh (September 29, 2011). "Appeals court nullifies 'don't ask, don't tell' ruling". The Politico . Retrieved September 29, 2011 . ^ a b David F. Burrelli (February 2010). Homosexuals and the U. S. Military: Current Issues. DIANE Publishing. p. 20. ISBN 978-1-4379-2329-2. ^ National Archives: Executive Order 13140, October 6, 1999. Retrieved March 16, 2012. ^ CNN: "Pentagon to review don't ask, don't tell policy", December 13, 1999. Retrieved March 16, 2012. ^ Nagourney, Adam (December 9, 1999). "Hillary Clinton Faults Policy Of 'Don't Ask' ". The New York Times . Retrieved January 1, 2013 . ^ Mundy, Carl E. (December 20, 1999). " 'Don't Ask' Policy: Don't Call It A Failure". Philadelphia Inquirer . Retrieved December 30, 2012 . ^ Schmitt, Eric (December 25, 1999). "Gay Rights Advocates Plan to Press Clinton to Undo Policy of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' ". The New York Times . Retrieved January 11, 2013 . ^ The New York Times: Steven Lee Myers, "Officers Riled by Policy on Gays Proposed in Gore-Bradley Debate", January 7, 2000. Retrieved April 8, 2012. ^ American Presidency Project: Democratic Party Platform of 2000, August 14, 2000. Retrieved December 27, 2012. ^ American Presidency Project: Republican Party Platform of 2000, July 31, 2000. Retrieved December 27, 2012. ^ ABC News: Julia Campbell, "Bush on Gay Rights Issues", January 17, 2001. Retrieved April 4, 2012. ^ Singer, Lt Col Charles McLean and Peter W. (May 27, 2010). "Don't Make a Big Deal of Ending Don't Ask Don't Tell: Lessons from U.S. Military Allies on Allowing Homosexuals to Serve". Brookings . Retrieved February 27, 2019 . ^ Publishing, Here (March 30, 2004). The Advocate. Here Publishing. ^ American Psychological Association: Proceedings of the American Psychological Association for the legislative year 2004. Minutes of the meeting of the Council of Representatives July 28 & 30, 2004, Honolulu, Hawaii. Retrieved March 5, 2012. ^ American Presidency Project: Republican Party Platform of 2004, August 30, 2004. Retrieved December 27, 2012. ^ American Presidency Project: Democratic Party Platform of 2004, July 26, 2004. Retrieved December 27, 2012. ^ a b "Report: 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' costs $363M". USA Today. February 14, 2006. Archived from the original on February 5, 2008 . Retrieved March 14, 2012 . ^ Chibbaro, Lou (2005). "Out gay soldiers sent to Iraq '' Regulation keeps straights from 'playing gay' to avoid war". Washington Blade. Archived from the original on May 16, 2008 . Retrieved March 6, 2006 . ^ Aaron Belkin, How We Won: Progressive Lessons from the Repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (Kindle Edition), ch. 6, paragraphs 22-5 ^ Belkin, How We Won, ch.2, paragraphs 18ff. ^ Nasaw, Daniel (June 29, 2009). "Don't ask, don't tell: gay veteran of Iraq takes on US army". The Guardian. London . Retrieved November 6, 2009 . ^ Benjamin, Stephen (June 8, 2007). "Don't Ask, Don't Translate". The New York Times . Retrieved December 29, 2012 . ^ Congress, House, Military Personnel Subcommittee, Don't Ask Don't Tell Review, 110th Cong., 2nd sess., July 23, 2008, 39 ^ Alvarez, Lizette (September 14, 2006). "Gay Groups Renew Drive Against 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' ". The New York Times . Retrieved December 29, 2012 . ^ ChristiansUnite.com: Chad Groening , "'Coordinated' Campaign Targets Military Ban on Homosexuals", September 21, 2006. Retrieved February 25, 2012. ^ a b The New York Times: John Files, "Advocates Hope Supreme Court Ruling Can Renew Attention to 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'", March 13, 2006. Retrieved February 19, 2012. ^ "Opinions of Military Personnel on Sexual Minorities in the Military" (PDF) . 2006. Archived from the original (PDF) on March 1, 2011 . Retrieved October 13, 2010 . Respondents uncertain whether they had served with gay personnel, 2% thought gays would have a positive effect on personal morale, while 29% thought that they would have no impact and 48% thought that they would have a negative effect. Regarding overall unit morale, 2% thought that gays would have a positive effect on overall unit morale, 26% thought they would have no effect, and 58% thought they would have a negative effect. Some 73% of respondents said that they felt comfortable in the presence of gay and lesbian personnel. ^ Lubold, Gordon (January 15, 2007). "Former JCS chairman: It's time to give 'don't ask, don't tell' policy another look". Air Force Times . Retrieved January 13, 2007 . ^ "Former Defense Secretary William Cohen Says Congress Should Re-Visit "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" ". Servicemembers Legal Defense Network. January 3, 2007. Archived from the original on January 12, 2011 . Retrieved December 22, 2010 . ^ a b Shanker, Tom; Healy, Patrick (November 30, 2007). "A New Push to Roll Back 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' ". The New York Times . Retrieved December 29, 2012 . ^ Shalikashvili, John (January 2, 2007). "Second Thoughts on Gays in the Military", The New York Times. Retrieved March 5, 2012. ^ Madhani, Aamer (March 13, 2007). "Don't drop 'don't ask, don't tell,' Pace says". Chicago Tribune . Retrieved December 30, 2012 . ^ Neikirk, William; Demirjian, Karoun (March 14, 2007). "Pace takes fire on gays remark". Chicago Tribune . Retrieved December 30, 2012 . ^ Shanker, Thom (March 14, 2007). "Top General Explains Remarks on Gays". The New York Times . Retrieved December 30, 2012 . ^ Marinucci, Carla (March 17, 2007). "Romney defends general, 'don't ask, don't tell' policy". San Francisco Chronicle . Retrieved September 23, 2014 . ^ Medved, Michael (September 5, 2007). "Larry Craig and "Don't Tap, Don't Tell" ". townhall.com . Retrieved December 30, 2012 . ^ a b c "Admirals, generals: Let gays serve openly". NBC News. Associated Press. November 18, 2008 . Retrieved October 13, 2009 . ^ Sidki, Pelin (November 10, 2009). "Discharged under 'don't ask, don't tell'". Retrieved March 12, 2012. ^ "Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Tells Cadets Military Ready to Accept Gay Service Members" (Press release). Servicemembers Legal Defense Network. May 6, 2008. Archived from the original on January 12, 2011 . Retrieved December 22, 2010 . ^ Herek, Gregory M.; Belkin, Aaron; Frank, Nathaniel; Hillman, Elizabeth L.; Mazur, Diane H.; Wilson, Bridget J. (May 12, 2009). "How to End "Don't Ask, Don't Tell": A Roadmap of Political, Legal, Regulatory, and Organizational Steps to Equal Treatment" (PDF) . Palm Center; University of California, Santa Barbara. Archived from the original (PDF) on December 18, 2010 . Retrieved December 19, 2010 . ^ Youssef, Nancy, "Judge rejects Obama's 'don't ask, don't tell' argument". October 20, 2010 . Retrieved July 14, 2015 . . In July 2009, the White House and other Democrats reportedly pressured Florida Rep. Alcee Hastings to withdraw an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 2647) that would have prevented the military from using federal funds to expel gay service members. Clark, Lesley (July 28, 2009). "Lawmaker backs off effort to fight Don't Ask, Don't Tell". The Miami Herald . Retrieved July 30, 2009 . ^ Time to review policy on gays in U.S. military: Powell, July 5, Reuters ^ Prakash, Om (2009). "The Efficacy of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" " (PDF) . Joint Force Quarterly. 2009 (55): 88''94. Archived from the original (PDF) on May 27, 2010 . Retrieved December 22, 2010 . The article won the Secretary of Defense National Security Essay competition for 2009. ^ Bumiller, Elisabeth (September 30, 2009). "Rare Source of Attack on 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' ". The New York Times . Retrieved December 29, 2012 . ^ Novak, Lisa M. (October 27, 2009). "Panel urges ending UCMJ's sodomy ban", Stars and Stripes. Retrieved February 20, 2012. ^ Stein, Sam (January 12, 2010). "DADT Repeal: Dems Move Forward With Plans". Huffington Post. USA . Retrieved January 14, 2010 . ^ Hornick, Ed; Ure, Laurie (January 27, 2010). "Obama Calls for "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Repeal". CNN Politics . Retrieved March 16, 2021 . ^ Joint Chiefs of Staff: "Testimony Regarding DoD 'Dont Ask, Dont Tell' Policy" Archived January 30, 2012, at the Wayback Machine, February 22, 2010. Retrieved February 19, 2012. ^ The Guardian: "Retired military officers: keep ban on gays", March 31, 2009. Retrieved February 19, 2012. ^ Chris Johnson, New report undermines officers' letter supporting 'Don't Ask', Washington Blade, March 3, 2010 ^ Krehely, Jeff; Teixeira, Ruy (February 17, 2010). "American Support Repeal of "Don't Ask Don't Tell". Center for American Progress . Retrieved March 16, 2021 . ^ "Gates eases ban on gays in the military". CNN. March 26, 2010 . Retrieved December 29, 2012 . ^ Crandall, Carla. "The Effects of Repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Is the Combat Exclusion the Next Casualty in the March Toward Integration?" (PDF) . ^ H.R. 1059 ^ "Obama: Repeal of 'don't ask, don't tell' possible". NBC News. Associated Press. April 10, 2008. ^ Scarborough, Rowan (November 21, 2008). "Obama to delay repeal of 'don't ask, don't tell': advisers see consensus building before lifting ban on gays". The Washington Times . Retrieved November 22, 2008 . ^ Obama, Barack; The Office of the President-elect (2008). "Plan to Strengthen Civil Rights". Agenda ' Civil Rights. Change.gov. Archived from the original on January 2, 2011 . Retrieved December 19, 2010 . ^ Simmons, Christine (October 10, 2009). "Gays Question Obama 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Pledge". USA Today. Associated Press . Retrieved December 10, 2009 . ^ Gerstein, Josh (October 10, 2009). "President Obama offers little new in speech to gay rights activists at HRC dinner". Politico . Retrieved October 11, 2009 . ^ "Obama calls for 'don't ask, don't tell' repeal". CNN. January 27, 2010. ^ Bumiller, Elizabeth (February 2, 2010). "Top Defense Officials Seek to End 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' ". The New York Times . Retrieved December 29, 2012 . ^ "Final vote results for roll call 317". Clerk.house.gov. May 27, 2010 . Retrieved December 19, 2010 . ^ Allen, Jared; Tiron, Roxana (May 25, 2010). "GOP to defend 'Don't ask, Don't Tell' ". The Hill . Retrieved May 30, 2010 . ^ Fritze, John (May 27, 2010). "Congress advances repeal of 'don't ask, don't tell' ". USA Today . Retrieved May 27, 2010 . ^ Herszenhorn, David M.; Hulse, Carl (May 27, 2010). "House Votes to Allow Repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Law". The New York Times . Retrieved May 28, 2010 . ^ Herszenhorn, David M. (May 28, 2010). "House Passes Bill With 'Don't Tell' Repeal". The New York Times. Archived from the original on January 1, 2022 . Retrieved December 29, 2012 . ^ "Senate halts 'don't ask, don't tell' repeal". CNN. September 22, 2010. ^ O'Keefe, Ed (November 15, 2010). "'Don't ask, don't tell' splitting gay rights groups". The Washington Post. Retrieved March 12, 2010. ^ "Collins v. United States '' Class Action for Military Separation Pay". American Civil Liberties Union. November 10, 2010. ^ a b Daniel, Lisa (November 30, 2010). "Repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Offers Few Risks, Report Finds". Armed Forces Press Service, United States Department of Defense. Archived from the original on January 15, 2012. ^ O'Keefe, Ed (November 30, 2010). " 'Don't ask, don't tell' report authors speak out". Washington Post. Archived from the original on September 1, 2013. ^ a b Department of Defense: "Report of the Comprehensive Review of the Issues Associated with a Repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'" Archived January 13, 2012, at the Wayback Machine, November 30, 2010. Retrieved January 30, 2012; comprehensive report. Survey results 63''79, analysis 120-6, quote 121: "Overall, in response to a variety of questions, 50''55% of the force indicated that repeal will have a mixed or no effect; about 15''20% believe that repeal will have a positive effect, while another 30% believe it will have a negative effect." ^ a b c Bumiller, Elisabeth (November 30, 2010). "Pentagon Sees Little Risk in Allowing Gay Men and Women to Serve Openly". The New York Times. Archived from the original on January 1, 2022 . Retrieved December 29, 2012 . ^ "Military and Civilian Professors Say That "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Debate is Over '' 30 Scholars Conclude that Prejudice is the Only Remaining Rationale for Gay Ban". Palmcenter.org. December 15, 2010. Archived from the original on July 25, 2011 . Retrieved December 19, 2010 . . The signers' affiliations included current and former academics at the Army War College, Naval Academy, West Point, Air Force Academy, Naval Postgraduate School, Naval War College, Air Command and Staff College and National Defense University and such non-military institutions as Harvard, Yale and Princeton. The statement was organized by the Pam Center. ^ Perkins, Tony (December 9, 2010). The Washington Times: "Listen to the Marines on 'Don't Ask'". Retrieved April 4, 2012. ^ Bumiller, Elizabeth (February 2, 2010). "Top Defense Officials Seek to End 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' ". The New York Times . Retrieved December 29, 2012 . ^ Bumiller, Elizabeth (December 3, 2010). "Service Chiefs Tell Panel of Risks to 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Repeal". The New York Times. Archived from the original on January 1, 2022 . Retrieved December 29, 2012 . ^ North, Oliver (December 7, 2010). "Gays in the Military", National Review: Retrieved February 26, 2012 ^ O'Keefe, Ed; Kane, Paul (December 9, 2010). " 'Don't ask, don't tell' procedural vote fails". The Washington Post . Retrieved December 10, 2010 . ^ O'Keefe, Ed; Whitlock, Craig (December 11, 2010). "New bill introduced to end 'don't ask, don't tell' ". The Washington Post . Retrieved December 13, 2010 . ^ "Final vote results for roll call 638". Clerk.house.gov. December 15, 2010 . Retrieved December 19, 2010 . ^ "U.S. Senate Roll Call", U.S. Senate, December 18, 2010. Retrieved December 18, 2010. ^ Hulse, Carl (December 18, 2010). "Senate Repeals Ban Against Openly Gay Military Personnel". The New York Times. Archived from the original on January 1, 2022 . Retrieved December 29, 2012 . ^ "Statement by Secretary Robert Gates on Senate Vote to Repeal 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' " (Press release). United States Department of Defense. December 18, 2010. Archived from the original on December 24, 2010 . Retrieved December 19, 2010 . ^ Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010 ^ Maze, Rick (January 14, 2011). "New bill seeks to slow DADT repeal" Archived January 20, 2011, at the Wayback Machine, Marine Corps Times: Retrieved February 14, 2012 ^ Tony Perkins, (April 19, 2011). "It's Not Too Late to Block the Repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'", Fox News: Retrieved April 4, 2012 ^ Stars and Stripes: "House panel votes to delay repeal of 'don't ask, don't tell'", May 12, 2011. Retrieved January 11, 2012; Shane, Leo III (June 16, 2011). "Lawmakers want Obama to halt DADT repeal", Stars and Stripes: Retrieved January 11, 2012 ^ "Military lays out plan to implement gay ban repeal". USA Today. January 29, 2011 . Retrieved December 29, 2012 . ^ "Defense Department Says It Will Deny Full Separation Pay For Gay And Lesbian Service Members Honorably Discharged Under "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" ". American Civil Liberties Union. January 29, 2011. ^ Gould, Joe (May 23, 2011). "3 colonels punished over skit mocking gays", Military Times: Retrieved February 14, 2012 ^ Dwyer, Devin (May 10, 2011). "'Don't Ask, Don't Tell': Navy OKs Bases, Chaplains for Same-Sex Marriages After Repeal", ABC News: Retrieved February 21, 2012 ^ Eckholm, Erik (May 11, 2011). "Navy Rescinds Guidelines For Same-Sex Marriages". The New York Times. Archived from the original on January 1, 2022 . Retrieved December 29, 2012 . ^ Keyes, Charley (May 9, 2011). "Navy plan to allow same-sex marriage on bases draws opposition", CNN: Retrieved February 21, 2012 ^ Dwyer, Devin (May 11, 2011). "Navy Scraps Rules on Gay Marriages After GOP Protest", ABC News: Retrieved 21 February 2011. ^ Tighman, Andrew (July 8, 2011). Army Times: "Pentagon suspends DADT in wake of court ruling". Retrieved July 11, 2011. ^ Marty Graham, (July 16, 2011). "Military members march for San Diego gay pride" Archived October 15, 2015, at the Wayback Machine, Reuters: Retrieved February 17, 2012. ^ Viola Gienger and Flavia Krause-Jackson (July 22, 2011). "Obama, Pentagon Certify End of Gay Ban Won't Harm Military". Bloomberg News . Retrieved July 22, 2011 . ^ Chris Geidner (July 22, 2011). "Gone in 60 Days". MetroWeekly . Retrieved July 22, 2011 . ^ Stars and Stripes: Shane, Leo III (August 30, 2011). "Gay military magazine to land at Army, AF bases". Retrieved February 17, 2012. ^ The Atlantic: "Memorandum" Archived January 5, 2012, at the Wayback Machine, September 20, 2011. Retrieved February 3, 2012. ^ "NUMBER 1332.14" (PDF) . United States Department of Defense. September 30, 2011. Archived from the original (PDF) on October 26, 2011 . Retrieved October 1, 2011 . ^ Belkin, Aaron; Ender, Morten G.; et al. (2013). "Readiness and DADT Repeal: Has the New Policy of Open Service Undermined the Military?". Armed Forces & Society. 39 (4): 587. doi:10.1177/0095327X12466248. S2CID 145357049. ^ Daily Beast: Josh Seefried, "I am a Gay Airman", September 19, 2011. Retrieved January 29, 2012. ^ The Huffington Post: "Randy Phillips, Gay Airman, Comes Out To Mom On YouTube", September 29, 2011. Retrieved January 9, 2012. ^ Mak, Tim (September 20, 2011). "Post-'don't ask', gay Navy Lt. marries". Politico . Retrieved October 3, 2011 . ^ Thomas Francis, "On base, 'don't ask, don't tell' demise is cause for celebration", NBC News: September 21, 2011. Retrieved January 28, 2012. ^ Brian Lowry, "The Strange History of Don't Ask, Don't Tell", Variety, September 18, 2011. Retrieved January 29, 2012. See also Internet Movie Database: "The Strange History of Don't Ask, Don't Tell (2011)". A private showing in San Francisco for OutServe preceded the public premiere. Retrieved January 29, 2012. ^ Dwyer, Devin (September 20, 2011). "'Don't Ask Don't Tell' Repeal Spares Decorated Air Force Aviator", ABC News: Retrieved January 31, 2012 ^ Jennifer Rizzo, (September 24, 2011). "Discharged gay sailor re-enlists in Navy Reserves", CNN: Retrieved January 27, 2012 ^ Fellman, Sam (December 12, 2011). "Twice-discharged gay sailor reinstated", Navy Times. Retrieved January 29, 2012. ^ Chris Johnson, (December 1, 2011). "'Pinning-on' ceremony 'big deal' for lesbian couple", Washington Blade: Retrieved January 28, 2012; Parrish, Karen (January 25, 2012). "Colonel 'Proud, Humbled' to Represent Gay, Lesbian Troops" Archived April 14, 2012, at the Wayback Machine, Department of Defense: Retrieved January 27, 2012 ^ Murray, Rheana (January 23, 2012). "LGBT servicemembers in Afghanistan post 'It Gets Better' video to encourage youth bullied because of sexuality", Daily News (New York). Retrieved January 27, 2012. ^ Miami Herald: Rothaus, Steve (February 28, 2012). "Gay marine, partner reflect on first kiss seen around the globe: 'The world went away for a few minutes'". Retrieved March 1, 2012; MSNBC: "Marine in gay kiss photo: Breaking stereotypes a 'good feeling'" , February 28, 2012. Retrieved March 1, 2012. ^ Rowan Scarborough, (March 1, 2012). "Gay Marine's kiss sparks praise, anger", The Washington Times. Retrieved March 1, 2012. ^ Keyes, Charley (September 30, 2011). "Military chaplains allowed to perform same-sex weddings", CNN: Retrieved February 21, 2012 ^ Stanley, Paul (October 6, 2011). "Evangelical Chaplains Refuse to Marry Gay Couples on Military Bases", The Christian Post: Retrieved March 3, 2012 ^ Andrew Tilghman, (September 30, 2011). "Church leader opposes DoD on same-sex weddings", Army Times. Retrieved March 5, 2012. ^ U.S. Air Force Academy: Don Branum, "Academy experts discuss effects of DADT repeal" Archived October 28, 2011, at the Wayback Machine, October 25, 2011. Retrieved February 17, 2012. ^ Burns, Robert (November 28, 2011). "Don't Ask Don't Tell: Top Marine Says Service Embracing Gay Ban Repeal", Huffington Post. Retrieved January 31, 2012. ^ a b Geidner, Chris (December 12, 2011). "Defense Bill Conference Report Strips Anti-Gay House Language, Keeps Military Sodomy Ban" Archived January 9, 2012, at the Wayback Machine, MetroWeekly: Retrieved February 20, 2012 ^ Article 125's prohibition against bestiality was included in its definition of sodomy. House Republicans, the Family Research Council, and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals objected to the removal of "unnatural carnal copulation ... with an animal" from Article 125, not "unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex". See: Herb, Jeremy (December 9, 2011). "Repeal of sodomy, bestiality ban sparks fight on Defense bill", The Hill: Retrieved February 20, 2012: "The Pentagon, however, says that even if the article in the military code was repealed, having sex with animals would still be covered under different statutes. 'It is difficult to envision a situation where a service member engages in sexual conduct with an animal that would not be conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline or service-discrediting,' said Defense spokesman Lt. Col. Todd Breasseale." ^ "U.S. military can wear uniform in San Diego gay pride parade: Defense Department". CNN. July 20, 2012 . Retrieved March 26, 2013 . ^ NBC Nightly News: "No incidents reported since DADT repealed", December 21, 2011. Retrieved March 3, 2012. ^ Tejada, Alicia (December 24, 2011). "'Out' on the Front Lines: Troops Reflect on 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'", ABC News: Retrieved March 3, 2012 ^ Shapiro, Lila (September 10, 2012). "Don't Ask Don't Tell Study Shows No Negative Effects On Military One Year After Repeal". Huffington Post . Retrieved September 10, 2012 . ^ Belkin, Aaron; Morton Ender (2013). "Readiness and DADT Repeal: Has the New Policy of Open Service Undermined the Military?". Armed Forces & Society. 39 (4): 587. doi:10.1177/0095327X12466248. S2CID 145357049. ^ Geidner, Chris (January 7, 2013). "Servicemembers Kicked Out Under Military's Gay Ban Since '04 To Receive Full Separation Pay". Buzz Feed. Archived from the original on January 9, 2013 . Retrieved January 7, 2013 . ^ Colorado Independent: Andy Birkey, "Openly gay soldiers may destroy military, Bachmann says", October 5, 2011. Retrieved January 30, 2012. ^ ABC News: Arlette Saenz, "Perry Prefers DADT, Says Obama Should Have Overthrown Iran Regime", November 8, 2011. Retrieved January 30, 2012. ^ NPR: Mark Memmott, "Boos Heard At GOP Debate After Gay Soldier Asks About 'Don't Ask'", September 23, 2011. Retrieved January 30, 2012. See also: "Santorum: Race, Homosexuality Not Comparable Measures for Military Service", Fox News: October 9, 2011. Retrieved January 30, 2012. ^ Rowan Scarborough, "Gingrich tough on women, gays in military", The Washington Times. December 11, 2011. Retrieved January 30, 2012. ^ Johnson, Luke (October 26, 2011). "Ron Paul: Heterosexuals 'Causing More Trouble Than Gays' In The Military", Huffington Post: Retrieved January 30, 2012 ^ Johnson, Chris (October 20, 2011). "Raising Cain". Washington Blade: Retrieved January 30, 2012 ^ Military Culture Coalition: Romney Endorses Gays-In-Military (LGBT) Law; Gingrich Opposed", December 12, 2011. Retrieved January 30, 2012. ^ Wolf, Z. Byron (September 23, 2011). "Debate Crowd Booed Gay Soldier", ABC News: Retrieved February 13, 2012 ^ "Obama: Don't stand silent when soldier is booed", NBC News: October 1, 2011. Retrieved February 13, 2012. ^ Fox News: "GOP lawmaker says 'don't ask, don't tell' repeal is settled issue", June 21, 2012. Retrieved July 14, 2012. ^ "Veterans Discharged Under 'Don't Ask Don't Tell' Get A Chance For VA Benefits". NPR.org. ^ Mark Thompson, "Why Is the Military Polling the Troops About Gays?". Time, July 12, 2010. ^ Paul Steinhauser, CNN Poll: 69% OK with gays in the military. CNN. February 22, 2010. ^ O'Keefe, Ed (December 15, 2010). "Most back repealing 'don't ask, don't tell,' poll says". The Washington Post . Retrieved December 19, 2010 . ^ Pew Research Center: "Most Continue to Favor Gays Serving Openly in Military", Nov 29, 2010. Retrieved February 14, 2012. ^ "CNN Opinion Research November 11''14, 2010" (PDF) . Retrieved December 19, 2010 . ^ Steinhauser, Paul (November 29, 2010). "Poll: Majority support gays serving openly in military", CNN Political Ticker: Retrieved February 14, 2012 ^ Quinnipiac University: "U.S. Voters Say Gays In Military Should Come Out, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds", February 10, 2010. Retrieved February 14, 2012. ^ CBS News: "Gays in the military", February 11, 2010. Retrieved February 14, 2012. ^ "Baptists, Catholics Threaten to Withdraw Chaplains Over DADT", November 1, 2010 Archived October 11, 2012, at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved February 16, 2012. ^ Banks, Adelle M. (June 19, 2010). "Southern Baptists Convention fighting 'don't ask, don't tell' repeal". The Washington Post. ^ "Southern Baptists Convention fighting 'don't ask, don't tell' repeal". The Washington Post. June 18, 2010 . Retrieved October 13, 2010 . ^ "Retired chaplains back 'don't ask'", The Washington Times October 31, 2010. Retrieved February 16, 2012. ^ "HRC Back Story, April 28, 2010". Hrcbackstory.org. April 28, 2010. Archived from the original on October 19, 2010 . Retrieved October 13, 2010 . ^ "Servicemembers Legal Defense Network". Sldn.org. August 4, 2010. Archived from the original on October 10, 2010 . Retrieved October 13, 2010 . ^ Resnicoff, Arnold E. (July 12, 2010). "If gays serve openly, will chaplains suffer? No, the mission is to serve all troops". USA Today . Retrieved October 13, 2010 . ^ Shane, Leo (January 16, 2009). "Stars and Stripes: Obama Wants to End "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" ". Stars and Stripes. U.S. Department of Defense . Retrieved January 21, 2009 . ^ Continued discharges anger 'don't ask, don't tell' critics: Gay-rights groups urge reversal now Bryan Bender, Boston Globe; May 20, 2009. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l Servicemembers Legal Defense Network '' Annual Gay Discharges Under "Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Pursue, Don't Harass" ^ a b c Individual service numbers from Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, "Freedom to Serve" Archived July 5, 2010, at the Wayback Machine ^ a b 365Gay.com '' Military Discharging Two Soldiers Per Day For Being Gay Despite War Group Says Archived July 2, 2008, at the Wayback Machine ^ Continued discharges anger 'don't ask, don't tell' critics The Boston Globe, Bryan Bender '' May 20, 2009 ^ "261 DADT Discharges in 2010". March 25, 2011. ^ "Rhode Island & New York restore military benefits to LGBTQ veterans". Bibliography [ edit ] Allan B(C)rub(C) (1990). Coming Out Under Fire: The History of Gay Men and Women in World War Two. Plume. ISBN 978-0-452-26598-1. Allan B(C)rub(C), "How Gay Stays White and What Kind of White It Stays", in My Desire for History: Essays in Gay, Community, and Labor History, John D'Emilio and Estelle B. Freeman, eds. (University of North Carolina Press, 2011)Elizabeth Drew (1994). On the Edge: The Clinton Presidency . Simon & Schuster. ISBN 0671871471. OCLC 31077297. Tim McFeeley, "Getting It Straight: A Review of the 'Gays in the Military' Debate", in John D'Emilio, William B. Turner, and Urvashi Vaid, eds., Creating Change: Sexuality, Public Policy, and Civil Rights (NY: St. Martin's Press, 2000)David Mixner, Stranger Among Friends (NY: Bantam, 1996)Randy Shilts (May 1, 1993). Conduct Unbecoming: Lesbians and Gays in the U.S. Military : Vietnam to the Persian Gulf . St Martins Press. ISBN 978-0-312-09261-0. Urvashi Vaid (1995). Virtual Equality: The Mainstreaming of Gay & Lesbian Liberation. Anchor Books. ISBN 0385472986. OCLC 32468601. Further reading [ edit ] Belkin, Aaron (2008). " 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell': Does the Gay Ban Undermine the Military's Reputation?". Armed Forces & Society. 34 (2). doi:10.1177/0095327X06294621. S2CID 144524502. Belkin, Aaron (2013). Readiness and DADT Repeal: Has the New Policy of Open Service Undermined the Military? Armed Forces & Society, Forthcoming ... Access OnlineFirst at http://afs.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/12/06/0095327X12466248.abstractBowling, Kirby L.; Firestone, Juanita M.; Harris, Richard J. (2005). "Analyzing Questions That Cannot Be Asked of Respondents Who Cannot Respond". Armed Forces & Society. 31 (3): 411''437. doi:10.1177/0095327X0503100305. S2CID 146142348. Carter, Chad C. and Antony B. Kolenc (2005). "'Don't Ask, Don't Tell': Has the Policy Met Its Goals?", University of Dayton Law Review, Fall 2005Huffman, J. Ford and Schultz, Tammy S. (editors) (2012), The End of Don't Ask Don't Tell: The Impact in Studies and Personal Essays by Service Members and Veterans, Marine Corps UniversityLevy, Yagil (2007). "The Right to Fight: A Conceptual Framework for the Analysis of Recruitment Policy toward Gays and Lesbians". Armed Forces & Society. 33 (2). doi:10.1177/0095327X06287616. S2CID 144959169. Moradi, Bonnie; Miller, Laura (2010). "Attitudes of Iraq and Afghanistan War Veterans toward Gay and Lesbian Service Members". Armed Forces & Society. 36 (3): 397''419. doi:10.1177/0095327X09352960. S2CID 145529543. Schaub, Gary Jr (2010). "Unit Cohesion and the Impact of DADT" (PDF) . Strategic Studies Quarterly. 4 (3): 85''101. External links [ edit ] Document Library, Robert Crown Law Library at Stanford Law LibraryText of Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010Elaine Donnelly and Aaron Belkin Debate DADT at Maxwell Air Force Base, summer 2010Don't Ask Don't Tell Review, House of Representatives, Military Personnel Subcommittee, July 23, 2008
Norman Lear - Wikipedia
Wed, 29 Jun 2022 19:34
American television writer and producer
Norman Milton Lear (born July 27, 1922) is an American television writer and film and television producer who has produced, written, created, or developed over 100 shows.[1] Lear is known for many popular 1970s sitcoms, including All in the Family, Maude, Sanford and Son, One Day at a Time, The Jeffersons, and Good Times. Lear continued to actively produce television, including the 2017 remake of One Day at a Time and the Netflix revival of Good Times in 2022.[2]
Lear has received many awards, including five Emmys, the National Medal of Arts, and the Kennedy Center Honors. He is a member of the Television Academy Hall of Fame. Lear is also known for his political activism and funding of liberal and progressive causes and politicians. In 1980, Lear founded the advocacy organization People for the American Way to counter the influence of the Christian right in politics, and in the early 2000s, he mounted a tour of the Declaration of Independence.
Early life [ edit ] Lear was born in New Haven, Connecticut,[3][4] the son of Jeanette (n(C)e Seicol) and Hyman "Herman" Lear, a traveling salesman.[4] He had a younger sister, Claire Lear Brown (1925''2015).[5] Lear grew up in a Jewish household in Connecticut and had a Bar Mitzvah ceremony.[6] His mother was originally from Ukraine, while his father's family was from Russia.[7][8][9]
When Lear was nine years old, he lived in Chelsea, MA [Interview with Norman Lear on NPR - air date January 16, 2022] when his father went to prison for selling fake bonds.[10] Lear thought of his father as a "rascal" and said that the character of Archie Bunker (whom Lear depicted as white Protestant on the show) was in part inspired by his father, while the character of Edith Bunker was in part inspired by his mother.[10] However, Lear has said the moment which inspired his lifetime of advocacy was another event which he experienced at the age of nine, when he first came across infamous anti-semitic Catholic radio priest Father Charles Coughlin while tinkering with his crystal radio set.[11] Lear has also said he would hear more of Coughlin's radio sermons over time, and found out that Coughlin would at times find different ways to promote anti-semitism by also targeting people whom Jews considered to be "great heroes," such as US President Franklin Roosevelt.[12]
Lear graduated from Weaver High School in Hartford, Connecticut, in 1940[13] and subsequently attended Emerson College in Boston, but dropped out in 1942 to join the United States Army Air Forces.
Lear enlisted in the United States Army in September 1942.[14] He served in the Mediterranean theater as a radio operator/gunner on Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress bombers with the 772nd Bombardment Squadron, 463d Operations Group of the Fifteenth Air Force; he also described bombing Germany in the European theater.[10] Lear flew 52 combat missions, for which he was awarded the Air Medal with four Oak Leaf Clusters. Lear was discharged from the Army in 1945, and his fellow World War II crew members are featured in the books Crew Umbriago, by Daniel P. Carroll (tail gunner), and 772nd Bomb Squadron: The Men, The Memories, by Turner Publishing and Co.
Career [ edit ] After World War II, Lear had a career in public relations.[10] The career choice was inspired by his Uncle Jack: "My dad had a brother, Jack, who flipped me a quarter every time he saw me. He was a press agent so I wanted to be a press agent. That's the only role model I had. So all I wanted was to grow up to be a guy who could flip a quarter to a nephew."[6] Lear decided to move to California to restart his career in publicity, driving with his toddler daughter across the country.[10]
His first night in Los Angeles, Lear stumbled upon a production of George Bernard Shaw's Major Barbara at a 90-seat theater in the round Circle Theater off Sunset Boulevard. One of the actors in the play was Sydney Chaplin, who was the son of actors Charlie Chaplin and Lita Grey. Chaplin, Alan Mowbray and Dame Gladys Cooper sat in front of him, and after the show was over, Chaplin performed.[10]
Lear had a first cousin in Los Angeles, Elaine, married to Ed Simmons, who wanted to be a comedy writer. Simmons and Lear teamed up to sell home furnishings door-to-door for a company called The Gans Brothers and later sold family photos door-to-door. Throughout the 1950s, Lear and Simmons turned out comedy sketches for television appearances of Martin and Lewis, Rowan and Martin, and others. They frequently wrote for Martin and Lewis when they appeared on the Colgate Comedy Hour and a 1953 article from Billboard magazine stated that Lear and Simmons were guaranteed a record-breaking $52,000 each to write for five additional Martin and Lewis appearances on the Colgate Comedy Hour that year.[15] In a 2015 interview with Vanity Magazine, Lear said that Jerry Lewis had hired him and Simmons to become writers for Martin and Lewis three weeks before the comedy duo made their first appearance on the Colgate Comedy Hour in 1950.[16] Lear also acknowledged in 1986 that he and Simmons were the main writers for The Martin and Lewis Show for three years.[17]
In 1954, Lear was enlisted as a writer hoping to salvage the new Celeste Holm CBS sitcom, Honestly, Celeste!, but the program was canceled after eight episodes. During this time, he became the producer of NBC's short-lived (26 episodes) sitcom The Martha Raye Show, after Nat Hiken left as the series director. Lear also wrote some of the opening monologues for The Tennessee Ernie Ford Show,[16][18] which aired from 1956 to 1961. In 1959, Lear created his first television series, a half-hour western for Revue Studios called The Deputy, starring Henry Fonda.
1970s [ edit ] Starting out as a comedy writer, then a film director (he wrote and produced the 1967 film Divorce American Style and directed the 1971 film Cold Turkey, both starring Dick Van Dyke), Lear tried to sell a concept for a sitcom about a blue-collar American family to ABC. They rejected the show after two pilots were taped: "Justice for All" in 1968[19] and "Those Were the Days" in 1969.[20] After a third pilot was taped, CBS picked up the show, known as All in the Family. It premiered January 12, 1971, to disappointing ratings, but it took home several Emmy Awards that year, including Outstanding Comedy Series. The show did very well in summer reruns,[21] and it flourished in the 1971''72 season, becoming the top-rated show on TV for the next five years.[22] After falling from the #1 spot, All in the Family still remained in the top ten, well after it transitioned into Archie Bunker's Place. The show was based loosely on the British sitcom Till Death Us Do Part, about an irascible working-class Tory and his Socialist son-in-law.[23]
Lear's second big TV sitcom, Sanford and Son, was also based on a British sitcom, Steptoe and Son,[24] about a west London junk dealer and his son. Lear changed the setting to the Watts section of Los Angeles and the characters to African-Americans, and the NBC show Sanford and Son was an instant hit. Numerous hit shows followed thereafter, including Maude, The Jeffersons (as with Maude a spin-off of All in the Family), One Day at a Time, and Good Times (which was a spinoff of Maude).[25]
What most of the Lear sitcoms had in common was that they were shot on videotape in place of film, used a live studio audience, and dealt with the social and political issues of the day.[26] Maude is generally considered to be based on Lear's wife Frances, something she herself claimed, with Charlie Hauck serving as main producer and writer.[27][28]
Lear's longtime producing partner was Bud Yorkin, who also produced All in the Family, Sanford and Son, What's Happening!!, Maude, and The Jeffersons.[29] Yorkin split with Lear in 1975. He started a production company with writer/producers Saul Turteltaub and Bernie Orenstein, but they had only two shows that ran more than a year: What's Happening!! and Carter Country. The Lear/Yorkin company was known as Tandem Productions that was founded in 1958. Lear and talent agent Jerry Perenchio founded T.A.T. Communications ("T.A.T." stood for the Yiddish phrase "Tuchus Affen Tisch", which meant "Putting one's ass on the line."[30]) in 1974, which co-existed with Tandem Productions and was often referred to in periodicals as Tandem/T.A.T. The Lear organization was one of the most successful independent TV producers of the 1970s. TAT produced the influential and award-winning 1981 film The Wave about Ron Jones' social experiment.
Lear also developed the cult favorite TV series Mary Hartman, Mary Hartman (MH MH) which was turned down by the networks as "too controversial" and placed it into first run syndication with 128 stations in January 1976. A year later, Lear added another program into first-run syndication along with MH MH, All That Glitters. He planned in 1977 to offer three hours of prime-time Saturday programming directly, with the stations placing his production company in the position of an occasional network.[16][31]
1980s and 1990s [ edit ] In 1980, Lear founded the organization People for the American Way for the purpose of counteracting the Christian right organization Moral Majority, founded in 1979.[32] In the fall of 1981, Lear began a 14-month run as the host of a revival of the classic game show Quiz Kids for the CBS Cable Network. In January 1982, Lear and Jerry Perenchio bought out Avco Embassy Pictures from Avco Financial Corporation, and the Avco part of its name was dropped after merging that with T.A.T. Communications Company to form Embassy Communications, Inc.[33] Embassy Pictures was led by Alan Horn and Martin Schaeffer, later co-founders of Castle Rock Entertainment with Rob Reiner.
In March 1982, Lear produced an ABC television special titled I Love Liberty, which was aimed to counterbalance groups like the Moral Majority.[34] Among the many guests who appeared on the special was conservative icon and the 1964 U.S. presidential election's Republican nominee Barry Goldwater.[34]
On June 18, 1985, Lear and Perenchio sold Embassy Communications to Columbia Pictures (then owned by the Coca-Cola Company), which acquired Embassy's film and television division (including Embassy's in-house television productions and the television rights to the Embassy theatrical library) for $485 million in shares of The Coca-Cola Company.[35][36] Lear and Perenchio split the net proceeds (about $250 million). Coke later sold the film division to Dino De Laurentiis and the home video arm to Nelson Holdings (led by Barry Spikings).
The brand Tandem Productions was abandoned in 1986 with the cancellation of Diff'rent Strokes, and Embassy ceased to exist as a single entity in late 1986, having been split into different components owned by different entities.[37] The Embassy TV division became ELP Communications in 1988, but shows originally produced by Embassy were now under the Columbia Pictures Television banner from 1988 to 1996 and the Columbia TriStar Television banner from 1996 to 2002.
Lear's Act III Communications was founded in 1986 and in the following year, Thomas B. McGrath was named president and chief operating officer of ACT III Communications Inc after previously serving as senior vice president.[38][39] On February 2, 1989, Norman Lear's Act III Communications formed a joint venture with Columbia Pictures Television called Act III Television to produce television series instead of managing.[40][41]
In 1997, Lear and Jim George produced the Kids' WB series Channel Umptee-3. The cartoon was the first to meet the Federal Communications Commission's then-new educational programming requirements.[42]
2000s and 2010s [ edit ] Norman Lear in 2014, at the Austin Book Festival
In 2003, Lear made an appearance on South Park during the "I'm a Little Bit Country" episode, providing the voice of Benjamin Franklin. He also served as a consultant on the episodes "I'm a Little Bit Country" and "Cancelled". Lear has attended a South Park writers' retreat,[43] and served as the officiant at co-creator Trey Parker's wedding.[44]
Lear is spotlighted in the 2016 documentary Norman Lear: Just Another Version of You.[45] In 2017, Lear served as executive producer for One Day at a Time, the reboot of his 1975-1984 show of the same name that premiered on Netflix starring Justina Machado and Rita Moreno as a Cuban-American family. He has hosted a podcast, All of the Above with Norman Lear, since May 1, 2017.[46][47] On July 29, 2019, it was announced that Lear had teamed with Lin-Manuel Miranda to make an American Masters documentary about Moreno's life, tentatively titled "Rita Moreno: The Girl Who Decided to Go For It".[48] In 2020, it was announced that Lear and Act III Productions would executive produce a revival of Who's The Boss? [49]
In 2014, Lear published Even This I Get To Experience, a memoir.[50]
Awards [ edit ] In 1967, Lear was nominated for an Academy Award for writing Divorce American Style.[51] Lear was among the first seven television pioneers inducted into the Television Academy Hall of Fame in 1984. He received five Emmy Awards (two in 1971, one each in 1972 and 1973, and one in 2019)[52] and two Peabody Awards (a personal award in 1977 and an individual award in 2016). He received the Humanist Arts Award from the American Humanist Association in 1977. His star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame is located at 6615 Hollywood Boulevard. In 1980, he received the Golden Plate Award of the American Academy of Achievement.[53]
In 1999, President Bill Clinton awarded the National Medal of Arts to Lear, noting, "Norman Lear has held up a mirror to American society and changed the way we look at it." Also in 1999, he and Bud Yorkin received the Women in Film Lucy Award in recognition of excellence and innovation in creative works that have enhanced the perception of women through the medium of television.[54]
In February 2017, Lear was awarded with the "Media Icon" Award from the National Hispanic Media Coalition.[55]
On May 12, 2017, Lear was awarded the fourth annual Woody Guthrie Prize presented by the Woody Guthrie Center based in Tulsa, Oklahoma.[56] The event took place in the Clive Davis Theater at the Grammy Museum in Los Angeles. The Woody Guthrie Prize is given annually to an artist who exemplifies the spirit and life work of Guthrie by speaking for the less fortunate through music, literature, film, dance or other art forms and serving as a positive force for social change in America. Previous honorees include Pete Seeger, Mavis Staples and Kris Kristofferson.[57]
On August 3, 2017, it was announced that the Kennedy Center had made Lear, along with Carmen de Lavallade,[58] Lionel Richie,[58] LL Cool J,[58] and Gloria Estefan,[58] one of the recipients of the 2017 Kennedy Center Honors.[58] US President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania Trump were scheduled to be seated with the honorees during the Kennedy Center ceremony, which took place on December 3, 2017,[58] and they were planning to host a reception with them at the White House earlier in the evening.[58] Variety magazine's senior editor Ted Johnson reacted with statements such as "That in and of itself will be an interesting moment, as Lear and Estefan have been particularly outspoken against Trump and his policies."[58] It was afterwards announced that Lear would boycott the White House reception.[59] In the end, the President and First Lady did not attend.
In 2019, Lear was awarded the Britannia Award for Excellence in Television.[60] The Norman Lear Achievement Award in Television, issued by the Producers Guild of America, was named after Lear, and he was a recipient in 2005.
Political and cultural activities [ edit ] In addition to his success as a TV writer and producer, Lear is an outspoken supporter of First Amendment and liberal causes. The only time that he did not support the Democratic candidate for President was in 1980. He supported John Anderson because he considered the Carter administration to be "a complete disaster".[61]
Lear was one of the wealthy Jewish Angelenos known as the Malibu Mafia.[62] In the 1970s and 1980s, the group discussed progressive and liberal political issues, and worked together to fund them. They helped to fund the legal defense of Daniel Ellsberg who had released the Pentagon Papers,[63] and they backed the struggling progressive magazine The Nation to keep it afloat.[64] In 1975, they formed the Energy Action Committee to oppose Big Oil's powerful lobby in Washington.[63]
In 1981, Lear founded People for the American Way (PFAW), a progressive advocacy organization formed in reaction to the politics of the Christian right.[63] PFAW ran several advertising campaigns opposing the interjection of religion in politics.[65] PFAW succeeded in stopping Reagan's 1987 nomination of Robert Bork to the Supreme Court.[66] Lear, a longtime critic of far right Christian nationalism, is an advocate for the advancement of secularism.[67][68]
Prominent right-wing Christians (such as Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and Jimmy Swaggart), have accused Lear of being an atheist and holding an anti-Christian bias.[67][68] In the January 21, 1987 issue of The Christian Century, Lear associate Martin E. Marty (a Lutheran professor of church history at the University of Chicago Divinity School between 1963 and 1998) rejected those allegations, stating the television producer honored religious moral values and complimenting Lear's understanding of Christianity.[68] Marty also noted that while Lear and his family had never practiced Orthodox Judaism,[68] the television producer was a follower of Judaism.[68]
In a 2009 interview with US News journalist Dan Gilgoff, Lear rejected claims by right-wing Christian nationalists that he was an atheist and prejudiced against Christianity. Lear holds religious beliefs and has integrated some evangelical Christian language into his Born Again American campaign. He does believe that religion should be kept separate from politics and policymaking.[67] In a 2014 interview with The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles journalist Rob Eshman, Lear described himself as a "total Jew" but never a practicing one.[69]
In 1989, Lear founded the Business Enterprise Trust, an educational program that used annual awards, business school case studies, and videos to spotlight exemplary social innovations in American business until it ended in 1998. He announced in 1992 that he would reduce his political activism.[70] In 2000, he provided an endowment for a multidisciplinary research and public policy center that explored the convergence of entertainment, commerce, and society at the Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism. It was later named the Norman Lear Center in recognition.
Lear serves on the National Advisory Board of the Young Storytellers Foundation. He has written articles for The Huffington Post. Lear is a trustee emeritus at The Paley Center for Media.[71]
Declaration of Independence [ edit ] In 2001, Lear and his wife, Lyn, purchased a Dunlap broadside'--one of the first published copies of the United States Declaration of Independence'--for $8.1 million. Not a document collector, Lear said in a press release and on the Today show that his intent was to tour the document around the United States so that the country could experience its "birth certificate" firsthand.[72] Through the end of 2004, the document traveled throughout the United States in the Declaration of Independence Roadtrip, which Lear organized, visiting several presidential libraries, dozens of museums, as well as the 2002 Olympics, Super Bowl XXXVI, and the Live 8 concert in Philadelphia.[73]
Lear and Rob Reiner produced a filmed, dramatic reading of the Declaration of Independence'--the last project filmed by famed cinematographer Conrad Hall'--on July 4, 2001, at Independence Hall in Philadelphia. The film, introduced by Morgan Freeman, features Kathy Bates, Benicio del Toro, Michael Douglas, Mel Gibson, Whoopi Goldberg, Graham Greene, Ming-Na, Edward Norton, Winona Ryder, Kevin Spacey, and Ren(C)e Zellweger as readers. The film was directed by Arvin Brown and scored by John Williams.
Declare Yourself [ edit ] In 2004, Lear established Declare Yourself, a national nonpartisan, nonprofit campaign created to empower and encourage eligible 18- to 29-year-olds in America to register and vote. Since then, it has registered almost 4 million young people.[74]
2015 Iran nuclear deal [ edit ] Lear was one of 98 "prominent members of Los Angeles' Jewish community" that signed an open letter supporting the proposed nuclear agreement between Iran and six world powers led by the United States. The letter called for the resolution of the bill, warning that the ending of the agreement by Congress would be a "tragic mistake". The letter was also signed by billionaire philanthropist Eli Broad; Walt Disney Concert Hall architect Frank Gehry; Mad Men creator Matthew Weiner, and many more.[75]
Personal life [ edit ] Lear has been married three times.[13] He was married to Frances Loeb, publisher of Lear's magazine from 1956 to 1985.[76] They separated in 1983 and in the divorce settlement, Loeb received $112 million from Lear.[77]
Lear is a godparent to actress and singer Katey Sagal.[78]
Legal issues [ edit ] In 1977, African American screenwriter Eric Monte filed a lawsuit accusing ABC and CBS producers Norman Lear, Bud Yorkin and others of stealing his ideas for Good Times, The Jeffersons, and What's Happening!! Monte received a $1-million settlement and a small percentage of the residuals from Good Times and one percent ownership of the show. Monte, due to his lack of business knowledge and experience as well as legal representation, would not receive royalties for other shows which he created. However, Lear and other Hollywood producers, outraged over the lawsuit, blacklisted Eric Monte and labeled him too difficult to work with.[79]
Appearances in popular culture [ edit ] Lear plays the protagonist in the video to "Happy Birthday to Me", the first single from musician and actor Paul Hipp's 2015 album The Remote Distance.
The top of my bucket list always included a desire to sing. More than that '-- a desire to enchant an audience with my voice. I ached to be Sinatra or Torm(C) for just a night. You say a night's too much? How about just one song?"My friend, actor, singer-guitarist and composer, Paul Hipp, wrote the happy birthday song when he turned fifty. I loved it and asked if I could perform it as I turn ninety-three. That was the result, and I don't care what you say, I love it.[80]
TV productions [ edit ] Note: The above chart does not include the made-for-television movies The Wave, which aired on October 4, 1981, or Heartsounds, which aired on September 30, 1984.
Publications [ edit ] Lear, Norman. "Liberty and Its Responsibilities". Broadcast Journalism, 1979''1981. The Eighth Alfred I. DuPont Columbia University Survey, Ed. By Marvin Barrett. New York: Everest House, 1982. ISBN 978-0-896-96160-9. OCLC 8347364.Lear, Norman. "Our Political Leaders Mustn't Be Evangelists", USA Today, August 17, 1984.Lear, Norman and Ronald Reagan. "A Debate on Religious Freedom", Harper's Magazine, October 1984.Lear, Norman. "Our Fragile Tower of Greed and Debt", The Washington Post, April 5, 1987.Lear, Norman. Even This I Get to Experience. New York: The Penguin Press, 2014. ISBN 978-1-594-20572-9. OCLC 870919776.Further reading [ edit ] Carroll, Daniel P., and Albert K. Brown. Crew Umbriago. [S.l.]: D.P. Carroll, 1986.Turner Publishing Co. 772nd Bomb Squadron: The Men - the Memories of the 463rd Bomb Group (The Swoose Group). Paducah, KY: Turner Pub. Co, 1996. ISBN 978-1-563-11320-8Campbell, Sean. The Sitcoms of Norman Lear. Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland & Co, 2007. ISBN 978-0-786-42763-5Just Another Version of You. PBS American Masters documentary. 2016.Miller Taylor Cole. Syndicated Queerness: Television Talk Shows, Rerun Syndication, and the Serials of Norman Lear. dissertation, University of Wisconsin''Madison, 2017.References [ edit ] ^ Lear, Norman (2014). Even This I Get To Experience. Penguin. pp. preface. ^ Andreeva, Denise Petski,Nellie; Petski, Denise; Andreeva, Nellie (2020-09-14). "Netflix Orders Animated Version Of Norman Lear's 'Good Times' From Lear, Steph Curry & Seth MacFarlane". Deadline . Retrieved 2021-09-25 . ^ "Norman Lear Biography: Screenwriter, Television Producer, Pilot (1922'')". Biography.com (FYI / A&E Networks). Archived from the original on April 30, 2016 . Retrieved July 8, 2016 . ^ a b "Norman Lear Fast Facts". CNN. ^ Lynch, M.A.C. (12 March 2006). "Their Junior High Romance Has Lasted 60 Happy Years". Hartford Courant . Retrieved 16 October 2014 . ^ a b "An Interview with Norman Lear". Aish HaTorah. 6 March 2001 . Retrieved 29 December 2013 . ^ "Norman Lear - United States Census, 1930". FamilySearch . Retrieved 16 October 2014 . ^ "Family:Herman Lear and Jeanette Seicol (1)". WeRelate . Retrieved 16 October 2014 . ^ Stated on Finding Your Roots, January 26, 2016, PBS ^ a b c d e f Lopate, Leonard (15 October 2014). "Norman Lear's Storytelling, the Brooklyn Museum's Killer Heels". The Leonard Lopate Show. WNYC . Retrieved 16 October 2014 . ^ Schneider, Michael (17 September 2019). "How Norman Lear Devoted Himself to a Lifetime of Advocacy". Variety. ^ "Norman Lear: 'Just Another Version Of You' ". NPR.org. ^ a b "Overview for Norman Lear". Turner Classic Movies . Retrieved 16 October 2014 . ^ "Norman M Lear - United States World War II Army Enlistment Records". FamilySearch . Retrieved 16 October 2014 . ^ "Billboard". 31 October 1953 '' via Google Books. ^ a b c Gray, Tim (30 October 2015). "Norman Lear Looks Back on Early Days as TV Comedy Writer". ^ "Writing for Early Live Television | Norman Lear | television, film, political and social activist, philanthropist". ^ Sickels, Robert C. (8 August 2013). 100 Entertainers Who Changed America: An Encyclopedia of Pop Culture Luminaries [2 volumes]: An Encyclopedia of Pop Culture Luminaries. ABC-CLIO. ISBN 9781598848311 '' via Google Books. ^ "Justice For All". You Tube. Archived from the original on 2021-11-07 . Retrieved Sep 6, 2018 . ^ "Those Were The Days". YouTube. Archived from the original on 2021-11-07 . Retrieved Oct 8, 2018 . ^ Cowan, Geoffrey (28 March 1980). See No Evil. Simon and Schuster. ISBN 9780671254117 '' via Google Books. ^ Leonard, David J; Guerrero, Lisa (2013-04-23). African Americans on Television: Race-ing for Ratings. ISBN 9780275995157. ^ Prial, Frank J. (1983-05-12). "CBS-TV IS DROPPING ARCHIE BUNKER". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331 . Retrieved 2021-09-25 . ^ "Sanford And Son may have copied other shows, but Redd Foxx was an original". The A.V. Club . Retrieved 2021-09-25 . ^ Gray, Tim (2021-01-12). "How 'All in the Family' Spawned the Most Spinoffs of Any Sitcom". Variety . Retrieved 2021-09-25 . ^ Weinman, Jaime (2008-09-30). "Is It Time For Sitcoms To Go Back to Videotape?". Macleans.ca . Retrieved 2021-09-25 . ^ Nemy, Enid (1 October 1996). "Frances Lear, a Mercurial Figure of the Media and a Magazine Founder, Dead at 73" '' via NYTimes.com. ^ Lee, Janet W. (2020-11-20). "Charlie Hauck, Writer-Producer of 'Maude' and 'Frasier,' Dies at 79". Variety . Retrieved 2021-09-25 . ^ Roberts, Sam (2015-08-19). "Bud Yorkin, Writer and Producer of 'All in the Family,' Dies at 89". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331 . Retrieved 2021-09-25 . ^ Miller, Taylor Cole (2017). "Chapter 2: Rewriting Genesis: Queering Genre in Norman Lear's First-Run Syndicated Serials". Syndicated Queerness: Television Talk Shows, Rerun Syndication, and the Serials of Norman Lear (PhD). University of Wisconsin''Madison. ^ Nadel, Gerry (1977-05-30). "Who Owns Prime Time? The Threat of the 'Occasional' Networks". New York Magazine. pp. 34''35 . Retrieved 2009-10-04 . ^ "Lear TV Ads to Oppose The Moral Majority". The New York Times. 1981-06-25. ISSN 0362-4331 . Retrieved 2021-09-25 . ^ "Avco Embassy". The New York Times. 1982-01-05. ISSN 0362-4331 . Retrieved 2021-09-25 . ^ a b O'Connor, John J. (19 March 1982). "TV Weekend; LEAR'S 'I LOVE LIBERTY' LEADS SPECIALS (Published 1982)". The New York Times. ^ Michael Schrage (June 18, 1985). "Coke Buys Embassy & Tandem". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on May 2, 2013 . Retrieved January 25, 2013 . ^ Al Delugach; Kathryn Harris (June 18, 1985). "Lear, Perenchio Sell Embassy Properties". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on May 18, 2013 . Retrieved January 25, 2013 . ^ Ryan, Joal (2000). Former Child Stars: The Story of America's Least Wanted. United Kingdom: ECW Press. p. 150. ISBN 9781550224283. Archived from the original on 22 June 2022 . Retrieved 22 June 2022 . ^ "Los Angeles County". Los Angeles Times. December 12, 1987. Archived from the original on April 19, 2022. ^ "Executive Changes" . The New York Times. December 14, 1987. Archived from the original on April 26, 2022. ^ Knoedelseder Jr, William K. (February 2, 1989). "Norman Lear, Columbia Form Joint TV Venture". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on January 23, 2021. ^ Stevenson, Richard W. (February 2, 1989). "Lear Joins With Columbia To Produce TV, Not Manage" . The New York Times. Archived from the original on March 8, 2021. ^ "WB's 'Umptee-3' has Norman Lear's signature". Variety. September 15, 1997. Archived from the original on April 20, 2019 . Retrieved 28 May 2011 . ^ Snierson, Dan (March 14, 2003). "All in the Family's creator joins South Park". Entertainment Weekly . Retrieved December 29, 2013 . ^ "How Trey Parker and Matt Stone made South Park a success". Fortune. 2010-10-27 . Retrieved 2010-01-23 . ^ Ewing, Heidi; Grady, Rachel (July 5, 2016). "Not Dead Yet". The New York Times . Retrieved July 6, 2016 . ^ Verdier, Hannah (2017-05-11). "All of the Above With Norman Lear: the 94-year-old king of podcasts". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077 . Retrieved 2019-04-21 . ^ "All of the Above with Norman Lear on Apple Podcasts". Apple Podcasts . Retrieved 2019-04-21 . ^ Friedlander, Whitney (July 29, 2019). "Rita Moreno documentary coming from Lin-Manuel Miranda and Norman Lear". CNN Digital. ^ " 'Who's the Boss' Sequel in the Works at Sony". The Hollywood Reporter. 4 August 2020 . Retrieved 2021-01-02 . ^ EVEN THIS I GET TO EXPERIENCE | Kirkus Reviews. ^ "ACT III". Norman Lear . Retrieved 2021-09-27 . ^ Pond, Steve (September 15, 2019). "Norman Lear Breaks an Emmy Record, Becomes the Oldest Winner Ever". ^ "Golden Plate Awardees of the American Academy of Achievement". www.achievement.org. American Academy of Achievement. ^ "Past Recipients". Wif.org. Archived from the original on 2011-08-30 . Retrieved 2013-04-22 . ^ "February 2017, NHMC National Hispanic Media Coalition". NHMC National Hispanic Media Coalition . Retrieved 2021-08-04 . ^ "The Woody Guthrie Center Presents Woody Guthrie Prize Honoring Norman Lear '' GRAMMY Museum" . Retrieved 2021-09-27 . ^ "Norman Lear to receive Woody Guthrie Prize and Peabody Award". Oklahoman.com. April 12, 2017. ^ a b c d e f g h Johnson, Ted (August 3, 2017). "Norman Lear, Gloria Estefan Among Kennedy Center Honorees as Trump Protest Looms". ^ Baumgaertner, Emily (3 August 2017). "Kennedy Center Announces First Honorees of Trump Administration (Published 2017)". The New York Times. ^ Low, Elaine (October 25, 2019). "Britannia Awards Highlight the Breadth of U.K. Talent". Variety . Retrieved October 27, 2019 . ^ "de beste bron van informatie over theoscarsite. Deze website is te koop!". theoscarsite.com . Retrieved 2013-04-22 . ^ Brownstein, Ronald (1990). The Power and the Glitter: The Hollywood''Washington Connection. Pantheon Books. pp. 203''211. ISBN 9780394569383. ^ a b c Brownstein, Ronald (June 28, 1987). "The Man Who Would Be Kingmaker". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved August 12, 2020 . ^ Lacher, Irene (December 28, 1990). "Ultimate Outsider : Leftist and Fractious, the Nation Is Still Going Strong After 125 Years". Los Angeles Times. ^ Day, Patrick Kevin (October 7, 2011). "Norman Lear Celebrates 30 Years of People For the American Way". The Hollywood Reporter . Retrieved 6 May 2015 . ^ Johnson, Ted (November 27, 2011). "Lear sees politics the American way". Variety. ^ a b c Interview: Anti-Christian-Right Crusader Norman Lear on Becoming a 'Born-Again American' US News, Dan Gilgoff, February 10, 2009, Accessed February 26, 2013 ^ a b c d e A Profile of Norman Lear: Another Pilgrim's Progress Archived 2014-10-25 at the Wayback Machine Norman Lear.com, Martin E Marty, Accessed February 26, 2013 ^ "Norman Lear on race in America, Judaism, World War II and his bright future". The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles. 17 December 2014. ^ Lear, Norman (July 12, 1992). "A False Picture Presented of Hollywood's Role in Politics". The Buffalo News . Retrieved August 12, 2020 . ^ "Board of Trustees". Paleycenter.org . Retrieved 2013-04-22 . ^ Today Show interview with Katie Couric, February 8, 2002 ^ "press | Norman Lear | television, film, political and social activist, philanthropist". ^ "Yahoo! Helps Declare Yourself Drive More Than 1 Million Young Americans to Download Voter Registration Forms for 2004 Election". Yahoo! recent news. Yahoo! Inc. 27 October 2004. Archived from the original (Press release) on 4 March 2016 . Retrieved May 19, 2012 . ^ "98 Prominent Hollywood Jews Back Iran Nuclear Deal in Open Letter (Exclusive)". The Hollywood Reporter. ^ Behrens, Leigh (28 February 1988). "Frances Lear: 'Women Are Bursting Forth With Their Creativity' ". Chicago Tribune . Retrieved 16 October 2014 . ^ Nemy, Enid (1 October 1996). "Frances Lear, a Mercurial Figure of the Media and a Magazine Founder, Dead at 73". The New York Times . Retrieved 16 October 2014 . ^ Katey Sagal on Wise Guys, Lost and More!. 9 December 2005. TV Guide.com. Retrieved on 2015-12-30. ^ Classic TV Producer, Good Times No Longer. 29 July 2006. npr.com. Retrieved on 2021-09-06. ^ "Happy Birthday To Me" - Paul Hipp, YouTube, July 22, 2015 CBS News Sunday Morning interview with Norman Lear on January 10, 2021. "What makes Norman Lear, at 98, still tick?".External links [ edit ] Official website Norman Lear at IMDbBiography of Norman Lear at the Museum of Broadcast Communications website2006 story on Lear and All in the Family that describes Lear's interests and his life in VermontIndependence Road Trip463rd Bombardment Group Historical SocietyAppearances on C-SPANNorman Lear Interview Silver Screen Studios - Dispatches from Quarantine (June 29, 2020)
National Black Justice Coalition - Wikipedia
Wed, 29 Jun 2022 19:28
Civil rights group serving the black LGBT community in America
The National Black Justice Coalition (NBJC) is an American civil rights organization serving primarily Black lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people. Since 2003, NBJC has collaborated with national civil rights groups and LGBT organizations, advocating for the unique challenges and needs of the African American LGBT community in the United States.[7]
Activities [ edit ] In 2011, the organization identified the issues it would focus its programming efforts on:[7]
Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA)Marriage equalityBullying in schoolsDon't Ask, Don't TellHistorically black colleges and universities (HBCUs)HIV/AIDSBayard Rustin 2013 Commemoration Project [ edit ] On the 50th anniversary of the 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, the organization is honoring the courage and legacy of the march's chief organizer, openly gay civil rights leader Bayard Rustin. In addition to organizing the 1963 march, Rustin was also known for mentoring Martin Luther King Jr., and helping to form the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC).
Led by NBJC co-founder and political activist Mandy Carter,[8] the initiative includes ongoing collaborations with Walter Naegle, Rustin's surviving partner as well as the executor and archivist of Bayard Rustin's estate. The organization is also working with Nancy Kates and Bennett Singer, co-producers and co-directors of Brother Outsider: The Life of Bayard Rustin, a biographical documentary about Rustin.[9][10]
Black Church Summit [ edit ] In 2006, the organization held its first Black Church Summit in Atlanta, Georgia. During the first summit, the Rev. Al Sharpton denounced homophobia and called for greater inclusion of LGBT people.[11]
Black, Trans and Proud [ edit ] Black, Trans & Proud, a campaign promoting trans visibility and raising consciousness in the black community, was launched in honor of Transgender Awareness Week. The project called for community members to submit their photos and testimonials about their pride in the black trans community. As part of the campaign, NBJC featured ads with transgender leaders, including Kye Allums, Rev. Carmarion Anderson, Kylar Broadus, Laverne Cox, Janet Mock,[12] Monica Roberts, and Valerie Spencer.[13]
Emerging Leaders Initiative [ edit ] This program identifies young activists (ages 18''30) in the black LGBT movement, and provides opportunities for young leaders to build networks and take action in their communities.[14] The organization hosted the 2013 Black LGBT Emerging Leaders Day in conjunction with the Human Rights Campaign and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force on February 21, 2013, in Washington, D.C.[15]
Many Faces. One Dream. [ edit ] "Many Faces. One Dream." is a series of LGBT economic conferences for LGBT communities of color co-hosted by NBJC and the U.S. Small Business Administration. The events began in early 2013 and will eventually travel to 13 major cities throughout the country that have a significant LGBT presence in communities of color, including Atlanta, Chicago, Detroit, Ft. Lauderdale/Miami, Houston, Indianapolis, Los Angeles, New Orleans, New York City, Newark, New Jersey, Oakland/San Francisco, Philadelphia and Washington, D.C.
Participants are grouped into two tracks: "Starting Your Business" and "Taking Your Business to the Next Level". In the first track, training is provided on business plans, loans, marketing, and SBA's program and services. The second track is designed for LGBT firms that are currently in business, with a desire to expand and grow.[16][17]
OUT on the HIll [ edit ] Attendees '' black LGBT activists, allies, elected officials, faith leaders and youth '' discuss and implement strategies to educate federal lawmakers about public policies impacting the black LGBT community.[6][18][19]
#whatablacklesbianlookslike [ edit ] After the Lieutenant Governor of Florida, Jennifer Carroll, avoided answering questions about an alleged same-sex encounter with a female subordinate by telling a local news outlet that black lesbian and bisexual women 'don't look like her' in the summer of 2012, NBJC launched a campaign with the Twitter hashtag #whatablacklesbianlookslike.[20] After more than a week of pressure from groups like NBJC, Equality Florida and GLAAD, Carroll finally apologized, calling her comments "wrong and inexcusable" in a letter to Equality Florida's executive director Nadine Smith.[21]
History [ edit ] NBJC was co-founded by activist, author, and commentator Keith Boykin.
NBJC was founded on December 8, 2003, by a group of eight black civil rights leaders[2] '' Keith Boykin,[22] Mandy Carter,[23] Jasmyne Cannick, Donna Payne, Frank Leon Roberts,[24] Sonya Shields, Roddrick Colvin, and Maurice Franklin. The formation of the organization was announced during a press conference held at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.[1] Initially the group came together to challenge support from African American religious and civil rights leaders for Republican-led efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage. Instead, the group began raising money to place advertisements promoting same-sex marriage in the African American media. Within three years, the group had created an organization and employed a staff led by founding executive director H. Alexander Robinson.[2]
In July 2009, the organization became the first black LGBT group to address the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) board of governors when its deputy executive director, Jason W. Bartlett, urged the NAACP to pass resolutions issues pertaining to LGBT people of color.[25]
In October 2009, it was announced that Sharon Lettman-Hicks would be joining the organization as executive director. She had previously worked at People for the American Way as executive vice president of leadership programs and external affairs.[5]
See also [ edit ] LGBT rights in the United StatesList of LGBT rights organizationsReferences [ edit ] ^ a b "National Black Justice Coalition Announces National Campaign for LGBT Civil Rights" (Press release). National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. December 8, 2003 . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ a b c O'Bryan, Will (September 22, 2005). "Reaching the Summit: NBJC's H. Alexander Robinson and Donna Payne on their group's leadership summit, the African-American GLBT community's socio-political reality, and the MMM commemoration". Metro Weekly . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ a b c "GuideStar Reports for National Black Justice Coalition". GuideStar . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ a b "National Black Justice Coalition 2012 Form 990" (PDF) . Internal Revenue Service. December 1, 2012 . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ a b Mangum, Christopher (October 5, 2009). "National Black Justice Coalition Announces ED". The Advocate . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ a b "Interview with National Black Justice Coalition Executive Director Sharon Lettman-Hicks". LGBT Weekly. February 3, 2011 . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ a b "About Us". National Black Justice Coalition . Retrieved October 12, 2021 . ^ Baim, Tracy (July 24, 2013). "Old Lesbians Organizing for Change gather in St. Louis". Windy City Times . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ "Bayard Rustin 2013 Commemoration Project". National Black Justice Coalition . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ "Still Walking for Justice - November 3, 2012". Pauli Murray Project . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ Dade, Corey (May 22, 2012). "Blacks, Gays And The Church: A Complex Relationship". NPR . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ "Writer and trans activist Janet Mock tells NBJC why she's proud to be Black and trans". bklyn boihood. November 15, 2012 . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ "Black, Trans and Proud". National Black Justice Coalition . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ "Emerging Leaders Initiative". National Black Justice Coalition . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ "Quick Recap: NBJC Emerging LGBT Leaders Day in DC". bklyn boihood. March 6, 2013 . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ Stevenson, Jan (July 18, 2013). "SBA And NBJC Team Up". Between the Lines . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ "Many Faces. One Dream. LGBT Economic Empowerment Tour for Communities of Color". National Black Justice Coalition . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ Rea, Julius (September 19, 2012). "National Conference Supports Black LGBT". JET . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ "OUT on the HIll". National Black Justice Coalition . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ "Week in Review (September 2 '' September 8)". ELIXHER. September 8, 2012 . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ "whatablacklesbianlookslike". National Black Justice Coalition . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ "Sylvia Rhue - Oral History Interview - LGBT-RAN". LGBT Religious Archives Network . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ "Social Justice Activist Mandy Carter to Speak at BVU". Buena Vista University. April 2, 2012 . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . ^ "NBJC Board Members | National Black Justice Coalition". nbjc.org . Retrieved 2016-03-31 . ^ "NBJC First Black LGBT Group to Address NAACP Convention". Rod 2.0. July 17, 2009 . Retrieved July 25, 2013 . External links [ edit ] Official website
Sharon J. Lettman-Hicks - QueerBio.com
Wed, 29 Jun 2022 19:23
From QueerBio.com
Sharon J. Lettman-Hicks
Country United States
Birth - Death Occupation Activist
Description Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer, National Black Justice Coalition, a civil rights organization dedicated to empowering Black same-gender-loving, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people which works for social justice, equality, and an end to racism and homophobia. Formerly Executive Vice President, People For the American Way (PFAW) Foundation, where her responsibilities included leading the ''Homophobia in the Black Church'' program through their African American Religious Affairs division. Member of the National Business Inclusion Consortium for the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce (NGLCC); Project Advisory Committee Member of the LGBT Safe Schools Initiative for the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network (GLSEN); the Advisory Council of Creative Coalition's Be A STAR: Show Tolerance And Respect, a national anti-bullying initiative; and the Executive Committee of the National Black Leadership Forum. Formerly served on the Board of Directors for the National Stonewall Democrats and the Advisory Council of Progressive Majority's Racial Justice Campaign; and she has been a national trainer for Wellstone Action, Democracia USA and the Front Line Leaders Academy.
See Also LGBTQ Founders and Executives with Charitable Foundations Chamber of Commerce LGBTQ Leaders Race Activists in the LGBTQ CommunityFurther Reading/Research http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sharon-j-lettmanhicks/ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9-1QnJz5P8
Ricochet (1991 film) - Wikipedia
Wed, 29 Jun 2022 19:05
1991 film directed by Russell Mulcahy
Ricochet is a 1991 American action crime thriller film, directed by Russell Mulcahy, written by Steven E. de Souza, and starring Denzel Washington, John Lithgow, Ice-T, Kevin Pollak, and Lindsay Wagner. The film details a struggle between a Los Angeles district attorney (Washington) and a vengeful criminal (Lithgow) whom he arrested when he was a cop.
Plot [ edit ] In 1983, rookie Los Angeles police officer and law student Nick Styles (Denzel Washington) meets Alice (Victoria Dillard), and drifts away from childhood friend Odessa (Ice-T), who has become a drug dealer in South Central Los Angeles. Styles and his partner Larry Doyle (Kevin Pollak) patrol a carnival, where they encounter hitman Earl Talbot Blake (John Lithgow) and his accomplice Kim (Josh Evans). Styles is forced into an armed standoff when Blake takes a hostage. After stripping off his equipment and uniform off, Styles uses a gun hidden in his athletic supporter, shooting Blake in the knee and subduing him. The incident is caught on camera by an amateur videographer and televised, making Styles a hero. He and Doyle are promoted to Detective, while Blake and Kim are sent to prison.
Eight years later in 1991, Styles has become an Assistant District Attorney and is married to Alice with two daughters. Behind bars, Blake allies himself with the Aryan Brotherhood to plot an escape and take revenge against Styles. Kim is paroled and assists in Blake's escape. Blake and the AB members stage a deadly prison escape during a parole hearing, which only Blake and the AB leader survive. Blake murders the AB gang leader and burns his corpse; however, while in prison, he had swapped their dental records, in order to fake his own death and ensure authorities would believe that Blake had died in the fire.
Styles finds Odessa, now a major drug dealer in the neighborhood, and pleads with him to stop dealing to children. Blake and Kim kill a city councilman who works with Styles, planting child pornography in his briefcase and staging his death to look like a suicide, framing Styles for embezzling city funds. Blake and Kim abduct Styles outside his home and hold him hostage in an empty swimming pool for several days. They regularly inject Styles with heroin and cocaine while engaging in arm wrestling. Blake hires a prostitute (Linda Dona) to have sex with Styles. She ignores the weakened Styles' objections and rapes him as Blake records the incident on video. After Blake and Kim deposit an unconscious Styles on the steps of City Hall, Alice overhears Styles' superiors telling him he has tested positive for gonorrhea, and believes he is cheating on her.
Styles witnesses a video of Blake entering his daughters' room with a hatchet. Styles heads to the park where his family are watching a circus act, and holds a black-clad figure he believes to be Blake at gunpoint; the figure turns out to be a clown, making Styles seem unstable. Blake releases the recording of Styles' rape, making it appear as if Styles is soliciting prostitutes. District Attorney Priscilla Brimleigh (Lindsay Wagner) suspends Styles.
Determined to prove his innocence, Styles and Doyle beat information out of one of Blake's former AB allies. Blake fatally shoots Doyle and plants Styles' fingerprints on the gun.
Desperate, Styles contacts Odessa for help, bringing his family to the housing project Odessa uses as a drug lab. On the roof, Styles raves to the street below, apparently suicidal; this draws out Blake, who wants Styles to live a long, miserable life. Styles fakes his own death by escaping an explosion in the building.
Odessa's gang abducts Kim, and Odessa sends a message to Blake that Styles is alive and intends to find him, challenging him to come to the Watts Towers. Blake finds Kim tied to the scaffolding and kills him. On the towers, Blake and Styles fight until Odessa applies electricity to the metal tower, electrocuting Blake. Styles pulls Blake off the tower and as he falls, impales himself on a spike. Styles reunites with his family and calls out to Odessa one last time, inviting him to basketball. Television news crews broadcast the dramatic turn of events, declaring Styles innocent. When a newscaster (Mary Ellen Trainor) asks Styles for comment, he turns off the news camera.
Cast [ edit ] Denzel Washington as Assistant District Attorney Nick StylesJohn Lithgow as Earl Talbot BlakeIce-T as OdessaLydell M. Cheshier as R.C., Odessa's second In CommandKevin Pollak as Lieutenant Larry DoyleLindsay Wagner as District Attorney Priscilla "The Hun" BrimleighMatt Landers as Chief Elliott FloydSherman Howard as Public Defender KileyJosh Evans as "Kim" KimbleMary Ellen Trainor as Gail Wallens, the character she portrayed in Die Hard[2]Victoria Dillard as Alice StylesKimberly Natasha Ali as Lisa StylesAileaha Jones as Monica StylesJohn Amos as Reverend StylesStarletta DuPois as Mrs. StylesJohn Cothran, Jr. as Councilman U.B. FarrisMiguel Sandoval as Vargas, Drug DealerThomas Rosales Jr. as Gonzalo, Drug DealerGeorge Cheung as Huey, Drug DealerKenny Endoso as Liu, Drug DealerRick Cramer as Jesse Schultzman, Head of The Aryan Brotherhood.Jesse Ventura as Jake Chewalski, Blake's Cellmate and Aryan Brotherhood Member.Linda Dona as Wanda, Prostitute Hired By Blake to Frame Nick.Production [ edit ] Originally, the screenplay to Ricochet by Fred Dekker was written as a Dirty Harry film, but Clint Eastwood deemed it too grim. When the script was attached to Joel Silver as producer in a different direction, Dekker met Kurt Russell about starring while Dekker was to be director, which it never was able to reach in its pre-production stage.[3]
Reportedly, violent scenes in the film were heavily cut down following the test screenings. According to interview with director Russell Mulcahy, in one of the scenes that were cut out Blake physically abuses Styles until Styles vomits, and Blake gets a sponge to clean him up. This is why Styles has vomit on him when he is found in the streets. The uncut version of the film was never released.
Reception [ edit ] This section
needs expansion. You can help by
adding to it.
( December 2015
) On review aggregation website Rotten Tomatoes, the film has a score of 74% based on 19 reviews, with an average rating of 5.7/10.[4] Audiences polled by CinemaScore gave the film an average grade of "B" on an A+ to F scale.[5]
Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert gave the film two thumbs down on their show At the Movies, describing it as ridiculous, goofy, embarrassing, unsavory and distasteful but also stylish, ambitious and having some smart dialogue.[6]
Box office [ edit ] The movie had a modest box office. It premiered on October 4, 1991, making $4,831,181 in its opening weekend, 2nd behind The Fisher King, ending up grossing over $21 million in its theatrical run. It also came 5 weeks prior to the premiere of Cape Fear, a film starring Robert De Niro and Nick Nolte with a similar storyline.[7]
References [ edit ] External links [ edit ] Ricochet at IMDbRicochet at Box Office Mojo
Was Gandhi A Racist? YES! He Was Also A Pedophile ' AfricanGlobe.Net
Wed, 29 Jun 2022 18:42
Gandhi is no great soul, he was just another Indian who was sleeping with his own niece.AFRICANGLOBE '' Mahatma Gandhi has been variously described as an anti-colonial protester, a religious thinker, a pragmatist, a radical who used non-violence effectively to fight for causes, a canny politician and a whimsical Hindu patriarch.
But was India's greatest leader also a racist?
The authors of a controversial new book on Gandhi's life and work in South Africa certainly believe so. South African academics Ashwin Desai and Goolam Vahed spent seven years exploring the complex story of a man who lived in their country for more than two decades '' 1893 to 1914 '' and campaigned for the rights of Indian people there.
In The South African Gandhi: Stretcher-Bearer of Empire, Desai and Vahed write that during his stay in Africa, Gandhi kept the Indian struggle ''separate from that of Africans and coloureds even though the latter were also denied political rights on the basis of colour and could also lay claim to being British subjects''.
They write that Gandhi's political strategies '' fighting to repeal unjust laws or freedom of movement or trade '' carved out an exclusivist Indian identity ''that relied on him taking up 'Indian' issues in ways that cut Indians off from Africans, while his attitudes paralleled those of whites in the early years''. Gandhi, the authors write, was indifferent to the plight of the indentured, and believed that state power should remain in white hands, and called Africans Kaffirs, a derogatory term, for a larger part of his stay in the country.
Racial Segregation
In 1893, Gandhi wrote to the Natal parliament saying that a ''general belief seems to prevail in the Colony that the Indians are a little better, if at all, than savages or the Natives of Africa''.
In 1904, he wrote to a health officer in Johannesburg that the council ''must withdraw Kaffirs'' from an unsanitary slum called the ''Coolie Location'' where a large number of Africans lived alongside Indians. ''About the mixing of the Kaffirs with the Indians, I must confess I feel most strongly.''
The same year he wrote that unlike the African, the Indian had no ''war-dances, nor does he drink Kaffir beer''. When Durban was hit by a plague in 1905, Gandhi wrote that the problem would persist as long as Indians and Africans were being ''herded together indiscriminately at the hospital''.
This, in itself, say historians, is not entirely new and revelatory. Also, some South Africans have always accused the man who led India to independence of working with the British colonial government to promote racial segregation. In April, a man was arrested in connection with vandalising a statue of Gandhi. A hashtag #Ghandimustfall (sic) has gained circulation on social media.
Gandhi's biographer and grandson, Rajmohan Gandhi, says the younger Gandhi '' he arrived in South Africa as a 24-year-old briefless lawyer '' was undoubtedly ''at times ignorant and prejudiced about South Africa's Blacks''. He believes Gandhi's ''struggle for Indian rights in South Africa paved the way for the struggle of Black rights''. He argues that ''Gandhi too was an imperfect human being'', but the ''imperfect Gandhi was more radical and progressive than most contemporary compatriots''.
Ramachandra Guha, writer of the magisterial Gandhi Before India, writes that ''to speak of comprehensive equality for coloured people was premature in early 20th Century South Africa''. Attacking Gandhi for racism, wrote another commentator, ''takes a simplistic view of a complex life''.
The authors of the new book disagree.
''Gandhi believed in the Aryan brotherhood. This involved whites and Indians higher up than Africans on the civilised scale. To that extent he was a racist. To the extent that he wrote Africans out of history or was keen to join with whites in their subjugation he was a racist,'' Ashwin Desai told me.
''To the extent that he accepted white minority power but was keen to be a junior partner, he was a racist. Thank God he did not succeed in this as we would have been culpable in the horrors of apartheid.
''But if Gandhi was part of the racist common sense of the time then how does this qualify him to be a person that is seen as part of the pantheon of South African liberation heroes? You cannot have Gandhi as an accomplice of colonial subjugation in South Africa and then also defend his liberation credentials in South Africa.''
'Blind Eye'
Desai also rejects the assertion that Gandhi paved the way for the local struggle for Black rights '' ''in one sentence,'' he says, ''you are writing out the history of African resistance to colonialism that unfolded much before Gandhi even arrived''.
In his book, Guha writes what a friend in Cape Town once told him about Gandhi. ''You gave us a lawyer, we gave you back a Mahatma [Great Soul]''. Ashwin Desai thinks this is a ''ridiculous assertion'' about a man who ''supported more taxes on impoverished African people and turned a blind eye to the brutality of the Empire on Africans''.
The authors of the new book are not the first to challenge the conventional Indian historiography on Gandhi. Historian Patrick French wrote tellingly in 2013 that ''Gandhi's blanking of Africans is the black hole at the heart of his saintly mythology''.
More than a century after he left Africa, there has been a resurrection of Gandhi in South Africa. Despite their reservations about the 'man of Empire', Desai and Vahed acknowledge that Gandhi ''did raise universal demands for equality and dignity''.
But even the greatest men are flawed. And Gandhi was possibly no exception.
By: Soutik Biswas
Mahatma Gandhi '' A Pedophile Racist EXPOSED
Buck Breaking | Know Your Meme
Wed, 29 Jun 2022 18:41
Content Warning: Portions of the following entry contain mentions and/or depictions of sexual violence or abuse. If you need support or you or a loved one are in an abusive situation, please contact the National Sexual Violence Resource Center or call 1-800-656-HOPE.
AboutBuck Breaking refers to the act of sexually abusing Black slaves publically and in front of other slaves, in order to assert dominance, punish them and ultimately emasculate Black men. This is sometimes painted to be a closeted gay slave owner's way of acting out their repressed sexual urges, which were largely criminal at the time. There is debate as to whether or not Buck Breaking existed and how popular it was, with little historical evidence surrounding it. In 2021, a documentary by Tariq Nasheed featuring Judge Joe Brown titled Buck Breaking covering the history of the practice was released, claiming the practice still exists in some form today. The term became popular on 4chan's /tv/ and /pol/ boards following the film's release, particularly in mocking and ironic posts against Nasheed for spreading Buck Breaking as legitimate, and posts claiming Nasheed is interested in buck breaking as a fetish.
OriginThe history of sexual abuse towards slaves has been studied by numerous researchers. The term "buck breaking" comes from "Black Buck," a post-Reconstruction era (1861-1865) racist term used to refer to Black men who were seen as stereotypically violent or unruly and refused to work with the law and society. "Breaking a buck" refers to abusing the Black man to get him to follow orders. Specifically, it often pertains to sexual abuse.
Online DiscussionOne of the earliest posts online about buck breaking is an October 17th, 2012 post to the now-defunct Wordpress blog Diary Of A Negress. In the uncited post she describes the act of buck breaking and suggests the act was used largely by homosexual slave owners, writing:
The master, drunk on blood lust, would explain to all strong, young black men that if they do not follow strict orders and comply with the whims of the Overseer and the Master, this too would be their fate. He removed his own clothing and proceeded to savagely sodomize the buck in front his wife, family, friends and children. He then invited his associates from other plantations to join in the Nigger Festivities.In order for his plan to take effect, he would require the buck's male child to watch, front row center, so he too can witness his father's sexual demise and humiliation. Buck Breaking was the slave master's very effective tool to keep all young black slaves from ever being defiant and taking revenge. It also frightened the mother's and wives from ever giving consent to an uprising.
Buck Breaking was so successful that it was made into a ''Sex Farm'' where white men could travel from plantation to plantation feeding their sadistic, homosexual needs.
In October 2016 an anonymous user of 4chan's /pol/ board posted a graphic showing a post to an unknown forum sharing the same information about buck breaking and sex farms, as well as a post from a Facebook user showing a drawing depicting buck breaking, with a white man undoing his belt over a black man (censored version shown below).
Buck Breaking Myth DebateMany argue that, while sexual abuse towards slaves has been documented, the specific practice of Buck Breaking as a way of dominating and striking fear in slaves is a myth, with little-to-no substantial historical evidence to support it.
On July 31st, 2016, Redditor u/AristoPhilosor posted to /r/AskHistorians asking whether Buck Breaking was real. That day, u/sowser posted a long-form, cited comment denying Buck Breaking, noting that sodomy was a major crime at the time and not taken lightly, that it would never be used as a public punishment, and that the implication that slave owners were gay because of this is offensive among other arguments (shown below, click to expand). The poster acknowledges sexual abuse of slaves but says reports of Buck Breaking are exaggerated at best.
Believers in Buck Breaking often argue that there is little historical evidence of the practice because male-on-male sexual abuse is seen as taboo and embarrassing, especially back then, resulting in very little discourse about it.
On August 8th, 2016, YouTuber iAmBlackPlanet posted a video documentary on Buck Breaking, supporting its existence, garnering over 1 million views in five years (shown below). The documentary features narration detailing how Black men would be sodomized in front of their families to keep them from being defiant. The video does not offer sources.
On November 25th, 2018, director Tariq Nasheed, best known for his documentary Hidden Colors, posted to Twitter describing buck breaking, writing, "In slavery, there was a tactic called Buck Breaking where slave owners would sexually violate African males to break them down psychologically. The new Buck Breaking tactic is where white supremacists use their negro flunkies to shame Black men into having sex with transexuals" (shown below). Three years later he would release a documentary on the subject.
On November 26th, 2016, YouTuber VIRALBOOKMARK posted a clip where Tariq and other members of the Black community describe the act (shown below). The video's description uses the Diary Of A Negress article as a source.
SpreadBuck Breaking DocumentaryOn April 30th, 2021, Hidden Colors director Tariq Nasheed released a documentary titled Buck Breaking about the subject (trailer shown below).
The documentary's description on Amazon reads: "Buck Breaking is a documentary film about the historic sexual exploitation of Black people globally. The film shows the correlation between the historic exploitation of Black men during slavery and the Jim Crow era, to the Buck Breaking tactics used today."
The release of the film inspired a lot of discourse and trolling on 4chan and Twitter, many criticizing the director Nasheed for making a documentary about what they believe to be a myth and hypothesizing that he is a closeted homosexual who is into Buck Breaking as a fetish because of it (example shown below, left). Many also criticized Nasheed for hiring artists to create images depicting Buck Breaking (example shown below, right, art not confirmed to be from film).
Official Buck Breaking NFTsOn December 21st, 2021, Tariq Nasheed announced the sale of 10 official Buck Breaking NFTs on Twitter (shown below). The NFTs are available on OpenSea. Kiwi Farms user drateR shared the update on Nasheed's thread that day.
Each NFT is an original cartoon depicting a white man abusing a Black man in various ways, including holding a whip to a basketball player, holding a Black man in chains, and a white police officer escorting a Black man to prison (examples shown below). By December 22nd four of the NFTs sold for prices ranging from 0.1 Ethereum (estimated $403 US at the time of purchase) to 0.3 Ethereum (est. $1,200 US at the time of purchase).
Recent Videos (9) Recent Images (112) TagsEntry Editors (4) Request Editorship
Ed Buck - Wikipedia
Wed, 29 Jun 2022 17:57
American political activist and convicted murderer
Edward Bernard Peter Buck (n(C) Buckmelter; August 24, 1954) is an American convicted felon and businessman. A former model and actor, he made a significant amount of money running and selling the data service company Gopher Courier. He became involved in politics after the election of Evan Mecham as Governor of Arizona in 1986; Buck, an Arizona resident, led the effort to recall him from office, accusing him of racism and corruption. The experience led Buck to change his party affiliation from Republican to Democrat, and he has since donated heavily to Democratic politicians. In 2007, he ran an unsuccessful campaign for the city council of West Hollywood, California.
Two African-American men, the first in 2017 and the second in 2019, were discovered dead in Buck's West Hollywood home, later to be determined as due to drug overdoses. Several reports indicated that Buck had a history of bringing African-American men to his house, where he would reportedly inject them with high doses of crystal methamphetamine for sexual gratification.[1] He plied the men with drugs and then sexually assaulted them while they were unconscious or immobile.[2]
In January 2019, a coalition of 50 civil rights organizations called for law enforcement to investigate the matter. On September 17, 2019, Buck was arrested and charged with three counts of battery causing serious injury, administering methamphetamine and maintaining a drug house. He was convicted of nine federal charges in 2021; on April 14, 2022, Buck was sentenced to 30 years in prison.[2]
Early life [ edit ] Edward Bernard Peter Buckmelter was born in Steubenville, Ohio.[3][4] He grew up in Phoenix, Arizona, where he was educated at North High School and graduated from Phoenix College.[3][4]
Career [ edit ] Buck began his career as a fashion model in Europe,[4][5] where he also acted in television commercials and two movies.[3] He worked for a friend's company, Rapid Information Services, before buying it out of bankruptcy for US$250,000 and renaming it Gopher Courier. Buck became a millionaire upon selling it after five years.[4]
Buck led the campaign to impeach Arizona Republican Governor Evan Mecham in 1987 by founding the "Mecham Watchdog Committee".[3][5][6] He announced the campaign on December 21, 1986, before Mecham had even been sworn in,[7] and was the "leader" of a protest on the day of Mecham's inauguration.[8] In particular, Buck highlighted Mecham's "opposition to a King holiday, his proposal for voluntary drug testing and his plan to reduce the state police force by up to 300 officers".[9] Buck distributed bumper stickers that read "Mecham for Ex-Governor", and Arizona Attorney General Robert K. Corbin ruled that state employees were allowed to use them on their cars.[6] The anti-Mecham campaign "made Buck a household name in Arizona" according to The Arizona Republic.[5] In retaliation, Buck was attacked by Julian Sanders, the chairman of Arizonans for Traditional Family Values, over his homosexuality.[10][11] Buck switched his registration from Republican to Democrat in 1988.[4]
After moving to West Hollywood, California, Buck ran unsuccessfully for city council in 2007.[4] He formerly served on the steering committee of the Stonewall Democratic Club.[4][12][13] He has donated more than a total of $500,000 to political candidates and causes, almost all of them linked to the Democratic Party, including contributions to candidates like Hillary Clinton, Ted Lieu, Pete Aguilar, Adam B. Schiff, and Raja Krishnamoorthi as well as the Getting Things Done PAC.[4][14]
Criminal investigations [ edit ] On July 27, 2017, a young African-American man named Gemmel Moore died in Buck's apartment.[12][13][15] Paramedics found Moore, who had worked as an escort, naked on a mattress in the living room with a "male pornography movie playing on the television", according to a Los Angeles County coroner's report.[15] A spokesman for the coroner's office, Ed Winter, said Buck was inside his Laurel Avenue home at the time of Moore's death and that drug paraphernalia was recovered from the scene.[16] Police found sex toys, syringes, and "clear plastic bags with suspected methamphetamine in a tool box roll-cabinet in the living room", 24 syringes with brown residue, five glass pipes with white residue and burn marks, a plastic straw with possible white residue, clear plastic bags with white powdery residue, and a clear plastic bag with a "piece of crystal-like substance".[15] The death was investigated by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, and Los Angeles County District Attorney Jackie Lacey declined to charge Buck on July 26, 2018.[17] Jasmyne Cannick, a local writer, activist, and political candidate who investigated Moore's death, criticized Lacey's decision, writing on Twitter that any further deaths at Ed's residence would be Lacey's responsibility.[18]
Since the death of Gemmel Moore, multiple reports have indicated that Buck had a history of luring young, Black gay men to his apartment, where he would inject them with crystal methamphetamine for sexual gratification.[18]
On January 7, 2019, another African-American man, 55-year-old Timothy Michael Dean (a part-time adult film actor known professionally as Hole Hunter[19][20]), died at Buck's home.[21] Following Dean's death, a coalition of 50 civil rights organizations released a statement calling on local law enforcement to conduct a thorough investigation of Buck's role in the incident and calling on elected officials to return all contributions received from Buck.[22]
Buck was arrested on September 17, 2019, and charged with three counts of battery causing serious injury, administering methamphetamine and maintaining a drug house, according to the Los Angeles County district attorney's office. He was accused of having injected a 37-year-old man, who overdosed but survived, with methamphetamine on September 11.[23]
On September 19, 2019, a federal charge of "one count of distribution of methamphetamine resulting in death" was added by the United States for the death of Gemmel Moore, who died on July 27, 2017. That death had originally been ruled an accidental methamphetamine overdose by the Los Angeles County Department of Medical Examiner-Coroner.[24][25]
On August 4, 2020, a federal grand jury charged Buck with four additional felonies, bringing the total number of federal charges to nine counts. Buck was scheduled to go to trial on January 19, 2021,[26] but the date was postponed to April 20, 2021, due to COVID-19-related considerations.[27]
On July 27, 2021, Buck was convicted of nine federal charges, including the deaths of Gemmel Moore and Timothy Dean, maintaining a drug den, distributing methamphetamines, and solicitation of prostitutes.[28][29] On April 14, 2022, Buck was sentenced to 30 years in prison.[2]
Personal life [ edit ] Buck came out to his parents as gay at the age of 16.[4] He changed his surname from Buckmelter to Buck in 1981[3] or 1983.[4] He was the Grand Marshal of the 1989 International Gay Rodeo.[4][5] Buck formerly lived near Piestewa Peak in Phoenix, Arizona.[5] He moved to West Hollywood in 1991.[4]
References [ edit ] ^ Barron, Jesse (September 16, 2020). "What Happened Inside Ed Buck's Apartment?". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331 . Retrieved December 27, 2020 . ^ a b c Ormseth, Matthew (April 14, 2022). "Ed Buck sentenced to 30 years in prison for abuses that led to men's drug deaths". The Los Angeles Times. ^ a b c d e "Recall drive. Bucking the system: unlikely figure leads challenge to Mecham" . Arizona Republic. June 28, 1987. p. 10 . Retrieved November 21, 2017 '' via Newspapers.com. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l "Who Is Ed Buck?". WEHOVille. August 16, 2017 . Retrieved November 21, 2017 . But it has attracted a lot of attention from the right-wing media here and abroad, including publications such as the Drudge Report; TruNews, a Christian news site; Political VelCraft, a right-wing conspiracy site, and Voat.com, a website that promotes conspiracy theories such as PizzaGate. ^ a b c d e Van Der Werf, Martin (November 29, 1987). "Buck mirror image of Mecham, critics say" . Arizona Republic. Phoenix, Arizona. pp. 9''10 . Retrieved November 21, 2017 '' via Newspapers.com. ^ a b Stanton, Sam (February 13, 1987). "Recall-Mecham stickers OK'd for state workers' cars" . The Arizona Republic. p. 16 . Retrieved November 25, 2017 '' via Newspapers.com. ^ Stanton, Sam (December 21, 1986). "Recall bid on Mecham a bit early" . The Arizona Republic . Retrieved November 25, 2017 '' via Newspapers.com. ^ "Mecham begins term as 17th governor of Arizona with call for 'new beginning' " . Arizona Daily Star. January 6, 1987. pp. 1, 2 . Retrieved November 25, 2017 '' via Newspapers.com. ^ Harris, Don; Stanton, Sam (January 6, 1987). "Special budget session to be called by Mecham" . The Arizona Republic. pp. 1, 6 . Retrieved November 25, 2017 '' via Newspapers.com. ^ Carson, Susan R. (March 15, 1987). "Opponent of Mecham lambasted" . Arizona Daily Star. Tucson, Arizona. pp. 11, 12 . Retrieved November 21, 2017 '' via Newspapers.com. ^ "Phoenix man seeks to recall Mecham" . Arizona Daily Star. December 22, 1986. p. 32 . Retrieved November 25, 2017 '' via Newspapers.com. ^ a b Cullen, Terence (August 22, 2017). "Los Angeles investigators probing death of male escort at home of prominent Democratic donor". The New York Daily News . Retrieved November 25, 2017 . ^ a b "Investigation Underway Into Fatal Drug Overdose At Democratic Donor's WeHo Home". CBS Los Angeles. August 15, 2017 . Retrieved November 26, 2017 . ^ Branson-Potts, Hailey (October 17, 2019). "Ed Buck was known for his abrasive behavior. But politicians still took his money". The Los Angeles Times . Retrieved October 17, 2019 . ^ a b c Branson-Potts, Hailey; Winton, Richard (November 18, 2017). "Democratic donor's home was littered with drug paraphernalia after man died, coroner says" . The Los Angeles Times . Retrieved November 21, 2017 . Moore, who was black, had been homeless and had worked as an escort. ^ Winton, Richard; Tchekmedyian, Alene; Branson-Potts, Hailey (August 15, 2017). "Homicide detectives probe man's overdose death at the home of prominent L.A. Democratic donor Ed Buck". Los Angeles Times. ^ "LA County DA Declines to Charge Ed Buck in Death of Gemmel Moore". WEHOville. July 26, 2018 . Retrieved July 29, 2018 . ^ a b " 'Serial predator': L.A. writer has been sounding alarm on Ed Buck for over a year". NBC News. January 11, 2019 . Retrieved January 18, 2019 . ^ "Man Who Died in Buck's Home ID'd: Retail Worker, Adult Film Actor". The Advocate. January 10, 2019. ^ "The Story Behind the Man Found Dead in Ed Buck's Laurel Avenue Apartment". January 10, 2019. ^ "Death Reported at West Hollywood Home of Wealthy Political Donor Ed Buck '-- For the 2nd Time". KTLA. January 7, 2019 . Retrieved January 7, 2019 . ^ Branson-Potts, Hailey (January 11, 2019). "Ed Buck's attorney says critics have unfairly used race to blame his client for two deaths in his home". The Los Angeles Times . Retrieved January 27, 2019 . ^ Flynn, Meagan (September 18, 2019). "Democratic donor arrested after third man overdoses at his West Hollywood home". The Washington Post . Retrieved September 18, 2019 . ^ Chan, Stella; Mossberg, Cheri; Simon, Darran (September 19, 2019). "Democratic donor Ed Buck faces federal charge for allegedly providing lethal dose of meth". CNN . Retrieved September 20, 2019 . ^ Queally, James; Winton, Richard (September 19, 2019). "Democratic donor Ed Buck paid at least 10 men to use drugs for his own pleasure, prosecutors say". The Los Angeles Times . Retrieved September 20, 2019 . ^ "Grand Jury Charges Ed Buck with Four Additional Felonies, Including that He Enticed Victims to Travel Interstate to Engage in Prostitution". United States Department of Justice. August 4, 2020 . Retrieved August 8, 2020 . ^ Seneeze, Thom (January 15, 2021). "Ed Buck's Trial Has Been Postponed Again, and Further Delay Could Follow". Los Angeles . Retrieved April 15, 2022 . ^ Dazio, Stefanie (July 27, 2021). "Democratic donor convicted of offering drugs for sex; 2 died". AP News . Retrieved August 8, 2021 . ^ "West Hollywood Man Found Guilty of Drug Trafficking Charges, Including Giving Methamphetamine to Two Victims Who Died". www.justice.gov. July 27, 2021 . Retrieved March 5, 2022 . External links [ edit ] Donor Lookup for people named Ed Buck at OpenSecrets.org Donor Lookup for people named Edward Buck at OpenSecrets.orgJasmyne Cannick's writings on the death of Gemmel Moore
Mexican Super Meth: What You Need to Know | Haven House
Wed, 29 Jun 2022 17:53
A drug that is destroying the minds of Americans but no one is really talking about it.
Yes, today the United States is a wash i n an Heroin epidemic with addicts dying of overdoses everyday. There is a second drug that is destroying the minds of Americans but no one is really focusing on this particular issue related to addiction. It seems that Meth usage is more prevalent in middle class and lower income neighborhoods but that will soon change with the over prescribing of the prescription Amphetamine, Adderall. The story will be the same as most of those that now are abusing Heroin but their addiction started with the prescription drug Oxycodone or Vicodin. When an addict no longer has access to prescription drugs there is always an option readily available on the street. What is even more alarming is the fact that Ice known as Meth is being used as a replacement for Cocaine in what is known as a Speedball. The deadly mix of a stimulant and Heroin has killed quite a few celebrities such as Jimm Belushi in the past. When use see the list of chemicals I will post used in today's Ice or Meth it will be easy realize why this drug can cause permanent psychosis or brain damage.
Chemicals commonly used to make Crystal Meth:a) Pseudoephrineb) Acetonec) Freond) Red Phosporuse) Hydrophosphrous Acidf) Lithiumg) Hydriodic Acidh) Iodine CrystalsI) Phenylopropanolamine
Now keep in mind that all the above listed chemicals are highly corrosive or toxic and some can easily ignite causing an explosion during the manufacturing process of Meth.
Mental Health workers be prepared:Those who abuse Crystal Meth are highly unpredictable. When they are actually detoxing one minute they can appear to be extremely depressed or may actually be in a drug induced psychosis so when dealing with these types of patients be prepared for extreme mood swings. The effects of Meth can last for months in some cases after an addicts last usage of the drug and may need additional help rebuilding cognitive skills once they have detoxed. It has also been said that in some cases that Meth addicts can have issues with mood regulation for up to five years after they have gotten clean and sober. So as American deals with an Heroin epidemic it might want to keep an eye of an increase of addicts being admitted to hospitals due addicts to being in a Crystal Meth psychosis.
Visit the Haven House Addiction Treatment homepage.
Sam Quinones
Wed, 29 Jun 2022 17:53
Sam Quinones is an independent journalist & author of four books of narrative nonfiction
WATCH: Sam on C-SPAN BookTV's In Depth
REVIEWS: The Least of Us in Christianity Today & Plough Quarterly
Who is Jacob Engels? Wiki, Biography, Age, Parent thrown out of school board - Wikibious
Wed, 29 Jun 2022 17:33
Jacob Engels Wiki '' Jacob Engels BiographyJacob Engels was removed from a school board meeting in Florida after reading excerpts from a book available to high school students at district libraries. The sexualized book is ''Gender Queer: A Memoir'' by Maia Kobabe, which talks about LGBTQ sex.
She first raised questions after an irate mother found her on the shelves of the Keller Independent School District, who then took to social media to express her anger. However, the recent incident allegedly occurred at an Orange County School Board meeting, where President Teresa Jacobs asked police to remove Jacob Engels after reading the vulgar passage.
Jacob Engels threw out of school board meetingThe Waukee School District has removed books from the library shelves after parents complained that the books had exposed their students to inappropriate content.
At a Waukee School Board meeting Monday, parent Amber McClanahan read passages from several books that she said were available in the Northwest High School library. The excerpts, selected from ''All Boys Aren't Blue'', ''Lawn Boy'' and ''Gender Queer'' contained graphic written and visual representations of sexual acts between boys and, in one case, relatives.
''This,'' McClanahan said, displaying a graphic set of images, ''is also in the 'Gender Queer' book at Northwest High School, available for 14-year-olds to review and read.''
Mother Courtney Collier also raised concerns about books containing same-sex relationships at the October 11 board meeting. She said her 10-year-old son told her that a book about a boy who discovered he was gay was mentioned as a suggested reading article during a library class.
''This is an issue that we explicitly told the school that we did not want to discuss with our children and, as parents, I believe it is our right,'' she said. '''... I didn't realize that you as a district could go above us and expose our kids to content about sexual orientation and things like that that we said we didn't want to be part of their education at. Waukee schools. ''
In a statement, the district said the books are under review and are not currently available in school libraries.
''A review process, per Board policy, will determine whether all or any of these titles are returned to the library's shelves,'' she read in the statement. ''Specifically, upon completion of the review of each title, a recommendation will be made to the superintendent as to the future availability of these books in school libraries.''
The statement acknowledges that the content of classroom and library materials is occasionally challenged, and that the process for requesting a review of books or other materials should generally begin at the school or classroom level.
In Urbandale, Father Dennis Murphy said he found the ''Hey, Kiddo'' book in his son's backpack. The book is about a boy who lives with his grandparents and seeks to discover the truth about his family. I can't write what I saw, but I did find 33 different pages that contained sexual or libelous / vulgar content that, if spoken in my home, would be grounds for immediate discipline, ''Murphy said in an email.
''Gender Queer'' has also been removed from some school libraries in Texas and Virginia and has been the subject of recent school board debate in states such as Illinois, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina. Orange County Public Schools, however, took action after the meeting. In a statement, OCPS Director of Media Relations Shari Bobinski said: ''Four copies of the 'Gender Queer' book were in three of our 22 high schools. The School Board was unaware that this book was available in school media centers. At this time, the book is not on the library shelves and is under review. If anyone has a concern about materials or books found in our media centers or in our classrooms, Orange County Public Schools has a process for parents/guardians to submit a form to the school principal to address a restlessness ''.
Meanwhile, the video of Engels reading the passage has gone viral on the internet. In reaction, one user tweeted: ''I would be absolutely horrified and disgusted if I were a parent and found out that my children are exposed to this shit!'' The second commented: ''High power. Reprimand and expulsion of parents for trying to raise awareness. Amazing.''
''I don't understand why a school board would silence a tax-paying parent who is concerned about the vulgar language in a book and was treated as a criminal. Anyone who spoke was silenced. Speechless, ''one person wondered.
Read Also: Who is Brittney Cooper? Wiki, Biography, Age, Runs Black feminist blog
Who is Larry Sinclair and should we believe him? You decide. | Political Talk
Wed, 29 Jun 2022 17:27
Larry Sinclair makes some serious allegations against Barry O including the murder of a choir member of Reverend Jeremiah Wright's church which Barry attended while living in Chicago.
The gist of the story is Sinclair was listening to Barry on TV during his run for the presidency in 2007 claim he hadn't used drugs since his college days, Sinclair knew Barry was lying and thought the American people should know a man running for President is deceiving them.
Sinclair claims he had an encounter with Barry in November of 1999 while Sinclair was in town for some event/function. While in town Sinclair was using a limousine service for his transportation and he inquired of the driver if he knew anyone that could show him around the city of Chicago while he was in town. The driver said he knew of a person he could contact and later the driver introduced Sinclair to Barry at a downtown bar/lounge.
Well, that's all the further I'm going with the details'....when you get some time here's the presser where Sinclair recounts the encounter with Barry O'....
Larry Sinclair tells of his sexual and drug use encounter with Barry O ''Barrack Obama is a wannabe black man with a white man's penis.''
This post was edited on 3/24 at 12:46 pm
Andrew Gillum - Wikipedia
Wed, 29 Jun 2022 17:12
American politician (born 1979)
Andrew Demetric Gillum (born July 26, 1979) is an American former politician who served as the 126th mayor of Tallahassee. He served as a Tallahassee city commissioner from 2003 until 2014, first elected at the age of 23.[1] He is a member of the Democratic Party.
In 2018, Gillum was the nominee of the Florida Democratic Party to be the governor of Florida. He had won the Democratic primary election over a field of five other candidates, including former U.S. representative Gwen Graham and former Miami Beach mayor Philip Levine. In the general election, he lost in a close race to Republican U.S. representative Ron DeSantis.
In 2022, Gillum was indicted on 21 felony counts, including wire fraud, conspiracy, and making false statements, for allegedly diverting money raised during the campaign to a company controlled by one of his top advisors.[2][3]
Early life and education [ edit ] Gillum was born in Miami and raised in Gainesville, Florida. He is the fifth of seven children born to Charles and Frances Gillum, respectively a construction worker and a school bus driver. Gillum graduated from Gainesville High School in 1998 and was recognized by the Gainesville Sun as one of the city's "persons of the year." He then moved to Tallahassee to attend Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University (FAMU) to major in political science.[4]
Gillum served as president of the FAMU Student Government Association from 2001 to 2002 and was the first student member of the FAMU Board of Trustees. He was recognized by the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation as "emerging leader for 2003." Gillum was also a board member of the Black Youth Vote Coalition, a program of the National Coalition of Black Civic Participation in Washington, D.C. Gillum was elected to the Tallahassee City Commission prior to the completion of his college studies.[4][5]
Political career [ edit ] City of Tallahassee commissioner [ edit ] In 2003, aged 23, Gillum was elected to the Tallahassee City Commission for a one-year term, becoming the youngest person to be elected to the commission.[6] Gillum was a political science student at FAMU when he was elected.[4]
He was subsequently elected to a full four-year term, in 2004, garnering 72 percent of the vote, and was reelected in 2008 and again in 2012.[6]
Gillum served a one-year term as Mayor Pro Tem from November 10, 2004, through November 9, 2005. The joint body of city and county commissioners, known as the Capital Region Transportation Planning Agency, elected him to serve as their chairperson for a year (January 2005 through December 2005). Gillum has also served as lead commissioner for the Long Range Community Based Target Issue Committee.[7]
In 2005, Gillum was one of the commissioners who voted to give themselves a new retirement benefit through deferred compensation. The policy was late