04 August 21
Live on the homepage now!
Reader Supported News
he Senate worked all weekend on the famous Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal—a.k.a., the Kyrsten Sinema Protection Act of 2021. It appears that the mills of the clods grinders slowly, but they’re still getting there. However, for all the praise the B.I.D. is getting, it seems as though the Republicans are celebrating it as a partisan win.
Here’s Schumer. From Politico:
“It’s been decades since Congress passed such a significant standalone investment and I salute the hard work done here by everybody,” Schumer said. “Given how bipartisan the bill is and how much work has already been put in to get the details right, I believe the Senate can quickly process relevant amendments.”
And Sinema:
“This very process of finding bipartisan compromise and working together to achieve the objectives that the American people are depending upon us to do is the very heart and very core of why each of us serve in this government,” Sinema said. “It is why I ran for office.”
This is all very adorable. But then we come to Senator Rob Portman, the lead Republican in the negotiations and someone who never took his eye off the ball.
Portman, meanwhile, declared that "this process of starting from the center out has worked." He reiterated that the bipartisan bill focused on “core infrastructure” and would not raise taxes, meeting the two conditions Republicans set.
The Washington Post also points out that whatever bipartisan deal is hammered out isn’t entirely clear of the minefield:
But there nonetheless remains concern in both parties that some of the math is fuzzy, raising the potential that the package still could add to the federal deficit — and bring about significant fighting on the Senate floor.
OK, first of all, absolutely-no-tax-increases-ever is not “the center” by any measure except that of Portman and his party. Second, that business about “core infrastructure” is a shot across the bow regarding the second part of the Biden-Schumer grand design. And the members of the Republican half of this bipartisan triumph are suiting up to become Republicans again when it comes to that.
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), another GOP negotiator, addressed that argument Sunday evening, emphasizing that the bipartisan package was a separate effort. “I know members of both parties have mischaracterized our efforts as somehow linked to paving the way to the Democrats’ $3.5 trillion wish list,” Romney said. “If you don’t think our Democrat friends are going to push for that monstrosity with or without this bill then I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. They’re going to push for that anyway.”
Despite the demonstrable popularity of many of its principle features, the second bill, the one that Schumer says he will seek to pass through reconciliation, is going to be a genuine brawl with a Republican Party that rarely bargains in good faith, and that has been implacably committed to shoving as much of the nation’s wealth upwards as possible and doing everything it can to keep it there. The second bill is $3.5 trillion, and it is not bipartisan, and it contains a whole pile of things that the country needs and that Republicans believe it does not. Bipartisanship is illusory. The proof of that is coming down the track.
Nina Turner. (photo: The Hill)
ALSO SEE: Democratic Establishment Prevails
as Brown Beats Turner in Ohio Special Election
Turner lost the Democratic primary in Ohio's 11th congressional district to Shontel Brown, who is a Cuyahoga County Council member and is widely seen as the candidate of the party's establishment.
In her concession speech in Cleveland, Turner took aim at super Political Action Committees (PACs) that had opposed her election, and invoked biblical language to describe her defeat.
Turner said that Americans have been on a "long justice journey through a desert of despair, indifference, inequality, and racism."
"Tonight my friends, we have looked across the promised land, but for this campaign, on this night, we will not cross the river," she said.
"Tonight our justice journey continues and I am proud to continue that journey with each and every one of you," Turner said to applause.
Turner went on: "I am going to work hard to ensure that something like this never happens to a progressive candidate again. We didn't lose this race—the evil money manipulated and maligned this election," she said.
Brown defeated Turner with 51 percent to 44 percent in a district where the Democratic nominee is almost certain to win the special election to the House of Representatives. The seat was vacated when former Representative Marcia Fudge joined the Biden administration as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.
In a tweet earlier on Tuesday, Turner criticized super PACs for their involvement in the race.
"We've got billionaire-funded Super PACs fighting tooth and nail to stand in our way," Turner wrote. "They're spending millions to buy this election. We need real campaign finance reform in this country—but until then, let's show them that organized people work harder than Dark Money."
Turner, a former Ohio state senator, was accused of supporting Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein in 2016 over the Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton. Claims that Turner voted for Stein are unsubstantiated.
Turner led protests against Clinton at the 2016 Democratic National Convention and was offered the Green Party's vice presidential nomination that year, but she declined it. This has fed into long-running but unsubstantiated claims that Stein's campaign damaged Clinton's chances of winning the White House.
Stein told Newsweek: "The myth that Stein voters elected Trump is a voter shaming strategy used to suppress growing political discontent both inside and outside of the Democratic Party."
"It shouldn't be used against Nina Turner—however she voted—or anyone else. In fact, polls showed that Green voters in 2016 would overwhelmingly have stayed home if there was no Green in the race," she said.
Turner was endorsed by Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and progressive Democratic Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, while Brown was backed by Clinton and House Majority Whip James Clyburn. Brown is also facing a potential ethics investigation relating to allegations that she voted to award millions in contracts to companies connected to her romantic partner and campaign donors.
Rep. Cori Bush. (photo: AP)
The new moratorium comes after President Joe Biden and his administration allowed a previous freeze to expire, setting off fury among members of his own party.
The new ban applies to areas of the country with high or substantial transmission of Covid-19 and will last until October 3, according to the announcement.
"In the context of a pandemic, eviction moratoria -- like quarantine, isolation, and social distancing -- can be an effective public health measure utilized to prevent the spread of communicable disease. Eviction moratoria facilitate self-isolation and self-quarantine by people who become ill or who are at risk of transmitting COVID-19 by keeping people out of congregate settings and in their own homes," the statement read.
The eviction issue had escalated into a contentious dispute between the White House and progressive Democrats, who accused the President of saddling them with passing an extension at the eleventh hour. Biden's aides said everyone should have known the moratorium was expiring and that congressional action was needed.
Left in the lurch were millions of Americans behind on their rent because of the pandemic still gripping parts of the country.
The resolution will stop short of another nationwide eviction freeze, but instead will be more limited in scope, targeted to places with high Covid spread.
A source familiar with the effort said the announcement would cover 80% of US counties and 90% of the US population.
Biden's aides had repeatedly insisted he lacked legal authority to renew the existing moratorium, citing a Supreme Court opinion by Justice Brett Kavanaugh from late June that said another extension would require congressional approval.
The President said earlier Tuesday the new eviction ban would be different from the previous one. But he openly acknowledged it would likely face legal scrutiny, and said the time it takes for the court process to unfold will allow for emergency rental assistance to reach troubled tenants.
Biden said he'd sought out constitutional scholars to advise him on a path forward after the Supreme Court's ruling, and said the "bulk" of them warned an eviction moratorium was "not likely to pass constitutional muster."
But he said "several key scholars" told him it might, and he decided it would be worth the risk if it allowed extra time for already-allocated emergency rental funds to reach Americans who need them.
"At a minimum, by the time it gets litigated, it will probably give some additional time while we're getting that $45 billion out to people who are in fact behind in the rent and don't have the money," Biden said.
A senior administration official said the new eviction freeze from the CDC would be "different in form and structure" from the one that expired. It is directed at areas where the spread of the virus is most acute.
Over the past several days, the White House and CDC had searched for legal avenues to extend the now-expired nationwide ban on evictions as Democrats in Congress loudly accused him of inaction.
Staging a protest on the steps of the US Capitol, Rep. Cori Bush had said the President was letting down millions of Americans who needed protection from losing their housing. After word of the pending administration action emerged, Bush said, "Our movement moved mountains."
Biden spoke to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Tuesday to discuss the eviction issue and detail his plan to extend the moratorium to certain areas of the country, according to a person familiar with the matter. Pelosi had urged the administration to extend the moratorium, even after officials said it was legally impossible, calling it a "moral imperative."
Housing advocates embraced the effort.
"This is a tremendous relief for millions of people who were on the cusp of losing their homes and, with them, their ability to stay safe during the pandemic," said Diane Yentel, president and CEO of the National Low Income Housing Coalition. "Now, the work of state and local governments to distribute emergency rental assistance to tenants in need becomes all the more critical. The President has given them the time that they and millions of renters needed -- they must use it effectively and expedite assistance. The country is watching, and tenants and landlords are waiting."
Meanwhile, landlord groups expressed shock at the about-face after the administration said they did not have authority to extend the moratorium.
"Is it possible for the federal government to create any more uncertainty for renters and rental home property owners in this country?" said David Howard, executive director of the National Rental Home Council, an industry group of property owners. "Shame on me for assuming the moratorium would not be extended after the President announced he has no legal authority to do so, nor was Congress able to pass legislation to do so. Meanwhile, rental home property owners have lost billions of dollars they will never recover."
Officials have been working for days to try and identify a pathway to address the implications of the July 31 expiration of the moratorium, as well as manage sharply negative political fallout driven by frustrated Democrats on Capitol Hill.
House Democratic leaders, who have called for Biden to find a way to extend the moratorium, are keenly aware they don't have the votes to pass anything legislatively. Prospects in the Senate are even worse.
That has put the entire onus on the administration in recent days, with increasing pressure driven by progressive Democrats.
That reality has raised questions about whether any new effort would survive a legal challenge, officials say. That likely includes the new actions the Biden is considering.
But under immense pressure from House Democrats, from Pelosi on down, to act, the administration has continued to press for options.
"We are still continuing to look at legal options. That process has not concluded," Psaki told reporters earlier Tuesday.
A Central American migrant carries her child just after she was sent to Mexico from the U.S. under the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), in Tijuana, Mexico, July 18, 2019. (photo: Carlos Jasso/Reuters)
The rights group is resuming a lawsuit against the administration for its use of a public health order to expel migrants. Biden officials have no plans to stop using it.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has issued an updated order that maintains there is a public health justification, given the ongoing pandemic, for the Biden administration to continue kicking out migrants without allowing them to seek asylum. The order can remain in effect indefinitely.
It comes after the ACLU on Monday announced it would go back to court after negotiations with the Biden administration fell apart. The ACLU for months has pressed Biden officials to stop using the public health authority to expel migrant families.
“It’s clear there’s no end in sight to Title 42 and we will pursue an immediate injunction,” Lee Gelernt, deputy director of the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project and lead attorney on the case. “The Biden administration asked for some time to repair the damage done by the Trump administration to the asylum process, but it has now been seven months. That’s a more than sufficient amount of time.”
Last week, the administration backed away from plans to begin phasing out its use of Title 42. It was expected to stop expelling migrant families at the end of July, but the fast-spreading Delta variant of the coronavirus and surging numbers of border apprehensions derailed those plans.
Former President Donald Trump first made use of Title 42 at the start of the pandemic to expel migrants without allowing them to seek asylum. Shortly after Biden took office, the ACLU agreed to pause litigation against the administration so it could negotiate an end to the use of the public health authority.
Democratic lawmakers, immigrant advocates and public health experts for months have urged the Biden administration to rescind the policy, saying its use is unlawful, inhumane and not justified by public health considerations. Migrants, they say, could be tested and isolated when they enter the country to help prevent the spread of Covid-19.
In a joint motion filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Monday, the ACLU and Biden administration agreed that negotiations “reached an impasse.” The Texas Civil Rights Project, RAICES, Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, Oxfam, ACLU of Texas and ACLU of the District of Columbia are also working with the ACLU on the lawsuit.
The Biden administration, for its part, argued on Monday that lifting Title 42 for migrant families would “exacerbate overcrowding at DHS facilities and create significant public health risks,” given the fast-spreading Delta variant and the record number of migrants arriving at the border. There’s also been a significant uptick in the number of migrants testing positive for Covid-19, an administration official said.
“The Department lacks sufficient capacity to safely hold and process all individuals seeking to enter the United States during the global pandemic if the U.S. Government were restricted in its ability to implement the CDC Order,” David Shahoulian, assistant secretary for the border and immigration policy at the Department of Homeland Security, said in a declaration filed to the court on Monday.
Migrant families have been apprehended at the U.S.-Mexico border more than 231,000 times this year, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection figures. Of those, more than 70,000 — about a third — of the families were expelled back to Mexico using the Title 42 order.
In recent months, Mexico has been increasingly more resistant to accepting families expelled from the U.S. under Title 42, resulting in a majority of families entering the U.S. to be permitted to remain in the country. Biden, for his part, has previously said migrant families should “all be going back.”
Last week, the Biden administration began to speed up deportations for some families who cross the U.S.-Mexico border and cannot be expelled under Title 42, a move that further frustrated immigrant advocates and attorneys. The practice, known as expedited removal, has been used by Democratic and Republican administrations to allow for U.S. border officials to expel migrants without a hearing before an immigration judge.
In a separate court filing for another case on Monday, the Biden administration acknowledged that Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and Attorney General Merrick Garland would not meet the 180-day deadline, set for Monday, for a review of the U.S. asylum system. Biden, in a February executive order, requested the review.
The lawsuit was brought on by Make the Road in 2019 to fight the Trump administration’s efforts to expand expedited removal. Both sides have agreed to keep the case on pause while the Biden administration reviews its policies. Now, the Biden administration said that DHS now anticipated completing the review by or before Oct. 29.
Armed homeowners Mark and Patricia McCloskey stood in front of their house in June 2020, confronting protesters who were marching to St. Louis Mayor Lyda Krewson's house. (photo: Laurie Skrivan/AP)
issouri Gov. Mike Parson on Tuesday announced that he made good on his promise to pardon a couple who gained notoriety for pointing guns at social justice demonstrators as they marched past the couple's home in a luxury St. Louis enclave last year.Parson, a Republican, on Friday pardoned Mark McCloskey, who pleaded guilty in June to misdemeanor fourth-degree assault and was fined $750, and Patricia McCloskey, who pleaded guilty to misdemeanor harassment and was fined $2,000.
"Mark McCloskey has publicly stated that if he were involved in the same situation, he would have the exact same conduct," the McCloskeys' lawyer Joel Schwartz said Tuesday. "He believes that the pardon vindicates that conduct."
The McCloskeys, both lawyers in their 60s, said they felt threatened by the protesters, who were passing their home in June 2020 on their way to demonstrate in front of the mayor's house nearby in one of hundreds of similar demonstrations around the country after George Floyd's death. The couple also said the group was trespassing on a private street.
Mark McCloskey emerged from his home with an AR-15-style rifle, and Patricia McCloskey waved a semiautomatic pistol, according to the indictment. Photos and cellphone video captured the confrontation, which drew widespread attention and made the couple heroes to some and villains to others. No shots were fired and no one was hurt.
Special prosecutor Richard Callahan said his investigation determined that the protesters were peaceful.
"There was no evidence that any of them had a weapon and no one I interviewed realized they had ventured onto a private enclave," Callahan said in a news release after the McCloskeys pleaded guilty.
Mark McCloskey decided to run for office after the incident
Mark McCloskey, who announced in May that he was running for a U.S. Senate seat in Missouri, was unapologetic after the plea hearing.
"I'd do it again," he said from the courthouse steps in downtown St. Louis. "Any time the mob approaches me, I'll do what I can to put them in imminent threat of physical injury because that's what kept them from destroying my house and my family."
Because the charges were misdemeanors, the McCloskeys did not face the possibility of losing their law licenses or their rights to own firearms.
The McCloskeys were indicted by a grand jury in October on felony charges of the unlawful use of a weapon and evidence tampering. Callahan later amended the charges to give jurors the alternative of convictions of misdemeanor harassment instead of the weapons charge.
Parson's legal team has been working through a backlog of clemency requests for months.
He hasn't yet taken action on longtime inmate Kevin Strickland, who several prosecutors now say is innocent of a 1978 Kansas City triple homicide. Parson could pardon Strickland, but he has said he's not convinced he is innocent.
Vitaly Shishov. (photo: Belarus Hous/The Daily Beast)
n activist whose NGO just helped the husband of a Belarus Olympian who defected to Poland escape to Ukraine has been found hanged in a park in Kyiv.
Vitaly Shishov, whose Belarus House in Ukraine has helped many dissidents who find themselves in the sights of autocratic leader Alexander Lukashenko get to safety, left Belarus in 2020 after feeling threatened after the widely disputed election results and vicious crackdown. Shishov had been warned by both Ukrainian officials and his allies in Belarus that the group was under surveillance and subject to “various provocations, including kidnapping and liquidation.” He had told friends that recently on his daily run, he had been approached by strangers and had noticed surveillance around the Ukraine capital.
His death, which is being investigated by Ukrainian officials as either a murder or suicide, comes one day after sprinter Krystsina Tsimanouskaya accepted asylum from Poland after refusing to board a flight to Minsk after the Belarus Olympics team pulled her from competition because she complained about her coach on social media. Tsimanouskaya’s husband, Arseniy Zdanevich, also an athlete, immediately fled to Ukraine on Sunday with the help of Belarus House, according to media reports.
Authorities have not officially tied the two incidents together.
Before his death, Shishov told those he worked with that he had a feeling something might happen to him, according to Yury Shchuchko, who worked at the NGO with him. “We have been warned to be more careful, because a network of Belarus KGB agents is operating here and everything is possible,” Shchuchko told media outlet Current Time. “Vitaly asked me to take care of his loved ones. He had a weird feeling.”
Shchuchko, who was part of the search party who was looking for Shishov after he failed to return from a run on Monday morning, told the Associated Press he had marks consistent with being beaten on his face. “Nothing was stolen, he was in regular clothes people put on to work out, and he only had his phone with him,” Shchuchko said.
Belarus has become increasingly dangerous for dissidents, including journalists like Roman Protasevich, who was taken into custody in Minsk on May 23, after a Ryanair flight from Athens to Vilnius, Lithuania, was forced to land over a false bomb threat. He and his partner, Sofia Sapega, were released separately into house arrest but remain under constant surveillance, according to BBC Russia. They have reportedly both “confessed” to their crimes, including organizing mass unrest, on Belarus television.
Early Tuesday, Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, the exiled leader of Belarus’ democratic forces and most likely the rightful winner of its 2020 election, posted her thanks to Ukraine authorities for investigating Shishov’s death.
In a statement, the Belarus House in Ukraine group blamed the Belarus government for Shishov’s death. “There is no doubt that this was a planned operation by security operatives to liquidate a Belarusian, dangerous for the regime,” the group said in a statement. “We will continue to fight for the truth about Vitaly’s death.”
Restoration practitioners in the Florida Keys place new mangrove saplings in the intertidal zone, where they will hopefully grow to stabilize the island's shores. (photo: Ian Wilson-Navarro)
Why? It turns out, these incredible trees are doing us a lot of favors to keep many of our habitats (including human ones) healthier and safe.
"Mangroves are often under-appreciated, with most people not realizing their true value to the overall health of our communities and our entire planet," said Tod Hardin, COO of Plastic Oceans International. In partnership with Plastic Oceans International, EcoWatch wants to highlight how mangroves protect our planet and how we can help them through restoration and replanting efforts.
Mangroves are shrubs or small trees that grow along coastlines and in brackish water, or water that is part salt and part fresh. In fact, these trees have adapted to grow in low-oxygen soil, where saltwater intrudes several times a day and where slow-moving water introduces fine sediment and particulates, NOAA reported.
Because they live where land and sea connect, one of their most important ecosystem functions is to protect the former and serve as a frontline defense for people and property along the coasts. There are many species of mangrove, and the most famous are characterized by their tall, skinny, stilt-like roots, called prop roots. These roots grow in a "tangle" that actually helps the trees withstand the daily rise and fall of tides. These structures also "cause sediments to settle out of the water," falling at or near the roots, NOAA reported. The roots "build up the muddy bottom" near the base of the trees, which actually stabilizes the coastline by reducing erosion from storm surges, currents, waves and tides, the government body noted.
In fact, protecting mangroves can prevent an estimated $50 billion in annual damages to the U.S. economy from hurricanes, tropical storms, winds, and flooding. The same report estimated that worldwide, mangroves reduce risk to more than 15 million people and prevent more than $65 billion in property damages each year.
Mangroves also serve to protect marine habitats from harmful nutrients and runoff that can harm seagrass, coral reefs and fisheries. The roots help filter water coming off from the land, including pollutants, heavy metals, pesticides and agricultural runoff, another NOAA report found. Mangroves therefore maintain water quality and clarity. They also control nutrient distribution to seagrass beds and coral reefs. Without natural filters like mangroves, dangerous conditions like red tide and sargassum and algal blooms can proliferate.
Mangrove restoration efforts around the world plant saplings into coastal waters to revive damaged shorelines. Tiffany Duong / Ocean Rebels
Thirdly, mangroves bolster animal and fish populations. The intricate root systems provide critical nursery habitats for many marine creatures, allowing them to forage and grow while remaining protected from predators. The leaves, or the nutrient-rich layer of decay they form amongst the roots, serve as the "foundation of the coastal food web," Smithsonian Ocean reported. Everything from baby sharks to lobsters and shrimp live in or near the roots before migrating to the reef, the oceanographic institution said. On land endangered birds, bats, fireflies and even royal Bengal tigers rely on mangroves for food and survival.
Finally, and critically, mangroves serve as a major "blue carbon sink", meaning they are excellent at absorbing and storing carbon from the atmosphere, Smithsonian Ocean reported. Like all trees, they sequester carbon as they grow and turn it into their leaves, roots and branches. However, because mangroves live at the coastline, when they die, the carbon stored in their pieces falls to the seafloor and becomes buried in the soil. Trapped here, it doesn't reenter the atmosphere if it remains undisturbed.
Hardin estimated this CO2 depository to hold up to four times what rainforests can, making their survival critical to the planet's survival against the climate crisis.
So, what's happening to the world's mangroves?
According to the American Museum of Natural History (AMNH), less than 50 percent of the world's mangrove forests remained intact at the end of the 20th century, and half of those were in poor condition. The museum called mangrove forests "among the most threatened habitats in the world," and called losses "rampant" across the globe.
AMNH identified the main threats to mangroves as shrimp farming, tourism, agriculture, coastal development and the charcoal and lumber industries. Shrimp farming in Southeast Asia, in particular, has motivated the clear-cutting of thousands of acres of wetland to be replaced with artificial ponds teeming with disease, chemicals and way too many shrimp. This cash crop devastates the coastal habitat and leaves it unable to support natural community fishing and farming within just two to five years. Because the shrimp and profits are exported to westernized countries, many of these communities are then unable to survive and are forced to abandon their homes, AMNH noted.
With the world hopefully taking note of how important mangroves are for land, sea and climate, the focus is turning towards education and restoration efforts.
Tourism can flourish if and when these habitats remain healthy. Responsible tourism is necessary, AMNH and Hardin noted. Individually, we must be sure to prevent pollution, lawn runoff and plastics from entering our waterways and coastal habitats. This is step one, according to Hardin.
He said, "Without question, we must continue efforts to conserve and restore mangrove ecosystems worldwide, including the most basic process of simply keeping them clear of plastic pollution and other waste products."
Planting new mangroves helps to re-establish the shoreline stabilization and buffering that coastal communities rely on. New growth also supports the rich biodiversity along the water's edge that then feeds a healthy economy. Regulations can help limit clearcutting for agriculture and aquaculture, and increased funding for critical restoration projects are necessary.
The tree is a symbol of the interconnectedness of land and sea, a primary takeaway of the Trees & Seas Festival. As part of the international event, Plastic Oceans International and its local partners in Ventanilla, Mexico planted over 45,000 mangroves. They also toured the Los Petenes Biosphere Reserve to learn first hand of the vast importance they play in the communities of the Campeche state of Mexico.
Before the start, Hardin told EcoWatch, "Very few flora can claim to be as important to the overall health of our planet as mangroves are ー thus making them the perfect model for demonstrating the interrelationship between trees and seas... between land and water of any kind."
Follow us on facebook and twitter!
PO Box 2043 / Citrus Heights, CA 95611
