Tag Archives: grand

Donald Trump Has to Reassure Supporters That He’ll Win Arizona

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Saturday afternoon in Phoenix, Donald Trump did something no Republican nominee has had to do two decades: He promised to win Arizona.

He also promised to win Connecticut, said he would do “unbelievably well with the Mexicans,” and promised to solve “all of our problems” if elected president. But less than one month after he secured enough delegates to win the Republican presidential nomination, Trump’s usual bombast was surrounded by signs of his campaign’s own mortality.

For one thing, there was the fact that he was even appearing in Phoenix at all. Arizona was a strong state for Trump in the presidential primary, but it is an unusual place for a candidate to spend much time after winning the nomination. The state hasn’t voted for a Democrat in a presidential year since 1996. No Democrats hold statewide office here, and Mitt Romney won the state by more than 10 points in 2012. If Arizona were to become a battleground state, it would most likely signify a landslide. But Clinton leads Trump in Real Clear Politics‘ polling average of the state, and Trump’s rally on Saturday, at the Phoenix Memorial Coliseum—known locally as the “Madhouse on McDowell”—seemed to belie the state’s deep-red reputation. Trump told the crowd he was “up big in the state,” but then said it was “a very important state” and he would win it in the fall. Speaking a short while earlier, former Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, who joined was joined at the event by Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, drew a cheer from the crowd when she promised to “keep Arizona red.” They just might; but the biggest story was that it even needed to be said.

Throughout the event, Trump projected an air of confidence—”I feel like a supermodel except times 10,” he said of his media saturation—but there were signs that all was not going so swell with his campaign. He mocked a Politico story that quoted a Trump adviser suggesting Trump would consider giving up his presidential bid for the right amount of money. According to the story, Trump might accept a $150 million buyout. To hoots from the crowd, Trump boasted that he wouldn’t accept five times that much—but, he conceded, if they offered him $5 billion, he’d be foolish not to consider it. In the build-up to his grand entrance, one surrogate after another had engaged the audience in a call and response. The question was “Who’s the nominee?” After the week he’d had, it was starting to feel a little less than rhetorical.

In his most audacious promise, Trump recalled how he had won victory after victory in northeastern blue states during the Republican primary. His strong showings were a sign, he suggested, that he could compete and win in places like Connecticut in the general election. (A cynical person might note that Republican primaries are usually won by Republicans.) But Hartford will have to wait for another time; for now, he’s just trying to win Arizona.

View the original here – 

Donald Trump Has to Reassure Supporters That He’ll Win Arizona

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, Northeastern, ONA, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Donald Trump Has to Reassure Supporters That He’ll Win Arizona

Fight over Grand Canyon pits Native Americans against John McCain

Fight over Grand Canyon pits Native Americans against John McCain

By on Jun 17, 2016 3:45 pmShare

President Obama has already protected over 265 million acres of land and water in the U.S. — more than any other president in history. He’s headed out west this weekend to Carlsbad Caverns and Yosemite to celebrate that record, at the same time that there is a battle underway in Arizona to see one more region protected before he exits office.

Sierra Club and Native American tribal leaders have been organizing local support for designating 1.7 million acres around the Grand Canyon as the Greater Grand Canyon Heritage National Monument. Rep. Raul Grijalva, a Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee, has taken up the cause, proposing a long-shot bill to create the monument. Activists argue it would mean better protection for areas that have been harmed by uranium mining (there is a 20-year moratorium on new uranium mining in the greater Grand Canyon region). The Orphan Mine, a former copper and uranium mine in the area, closed in 1969 and is now a highly radioactive waste site.

While conservation efforts are popular among residents — 85 percent support national monuments and a plurality want more to be done for the Grand Canyon area — some lawmakers and business interests are pushing back. Republican Senators John McCain and Jeff Flake have advised Obama against conservation that would “lock away” land from development, even though the designation would only block uranium mining. The opposition is flanked by the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry, which called the proposal a “monumental mistake.”

But activists would say that leaving tribal sites and the Southwest’s largest old-growth Ponderosa pine forest unprotected would be its own monumental problem.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Source article:  

Fight over Grand Canyon pits Native Americans against John McCain

Posted in alo, Anchor, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Fight over Grand Canyon pits Native Americans against John McCain

The Election in Arizona Was a Mess

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Faith Decker, a 19-year-old sophomore at Arizona State University, got off work a little early Tuesday night so she could vote in her first-ever primary. She arrived at a church in southeast Phoenix just before 7 p.m. to find “the line wrapped completely around the corner, 300 to 400 people.” After waiting in that line for more than three hours, she finally reached the check-in desk. She was told that she couldn’t vote—not because the polls had closed three hours before, but because she was registered in a different county.

Decker says that while waiting in line, she saw several people get frustrated and leave before they cast their ballots, and that the election workers seemed confused, taking a long time to process voters once they got to the table.

“It’s just kind of all a giant disappointment to everyone who usually comes out and votes in person,” she said. And as a first-time voter she was shocked “to see that it was so unorganized, or disorderly.”

Decker’s long wait and disappointing outcome was shared by many voters in Maricopa County, Arizona, the state’s biggest county, with 2 million registered voters, who live in Phoenix, Scottsdale, Mesa, Glendale, and other larger communities. Images of people waiting hours under the hot sun and into the night filled Twitter timelines and cable TV broadcasts. The last person to cast a ballot didn’t do so until after midnight, according to the Arizona Republic, nearly five hours after the Democratic race had already been called for Hillary Clinton, and a few hours after Donald Trump was declared as the Republican winner.

Election officials said that the long lines were due, in part, to a large number of unaffiliated or independent voters trying to vote. Only those registered with one of the recognized parties were allowed to cast ballots. The state’s Republican governor, Doug Ducey, issued a statement Wednesday morning calling the situation “unacceptable” and called for allowing independents to be able to vote in presidential primaries.

But Arizona has a long history of problems at the ballot box. Until 2013, the Grand Canyon State was one of 16 states required to clear all changes to voting law and procedures with the US Department of Justice, under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, because of its history of discriminatory and racist election practices. The two-part formula used to determine which jurisdictions would fall under the Department of Justice’s review process was created nearly fifty years before in 1965 and attempted to insure that the voting age population actually was able to vote. The first criteria was if a jurisdiction had a “test or device” that restricted the opportunity to register to vote on Nov. 1, 1964. The state would also be scrutinized if less than half of voting-age people in a jurisdiction were registered to vote, or if less than half of the voting-age population actually did vote in the presidential election of November 1964.

The formula was ruled unconstitutional in the 2013 US Supreme Court decision Shelby County v. Holder, in which an Alabama County argued that jurisdictions covered by Section 5 “must either go hat in hand to Justice Department officialdom to seek approval, or embark on expensive litigation in a remote judicial venue.” With the court’s ruling, Arizona (and the other states and jurisdictions previously covered by so-called “pre-clearance”) could make changes to voting laws and procedures without federal oversight. But in a state that took six years to adopt a Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday, is the home of the controversial Maricopa County Sheriff, and Donald Trump supporter, Joe Arpaio, and where SB 1070 required police to determine a person’s immigration status when there was “reasonable suspicion” that they were in the country illegally, the difficulties in voting raised some concerns about darker motivations.

Maricopa County Recorder Helen Purcell, the woman in charge of administering the county’s elections, said in an interview with a local news reporter Tuesday night that “the voters, for getting in line” were at least partly to blame for the long lines:

On Wednesday she told the county board of supervisors that she would “do it differently” if she could do it again, and that she “takes the blame” for what went wrong. She also blamed independent and unaffiliated voters who tried to vote for slowing down the process. Maricopa County Supervisor Steve Gallardo said, “I just don’t buy that,” according to the Arizona Republic.

Purcell couldn’t be reached for comment.

One reason for the long lines is the fact that the county went from 200 polling locations in 2012 to just 60 in 2016. As Republic reporter Caitlin McGlade noted Tuesday night, Maricopa County’s 60 polling locations worked out to about one for every 20,833 eligible voters, compared to one polling station serving 2,500 voters in other Arizona counties.

State Sen. Martín Quezada, (D-Phoenix), offered his own explanation for the lack of polling locations in his area on Wednesday:

Tammy Patrick, the county’s former federal elections compliance officer, is now a senior advisor of the Democracy Project at the Bipartisan Policy Center in Washington DC, where she consults with jurisdictions around the country about voting administration best practices. She said that the comparison between 200 polling stations in 2012 and 60 in 2016 is misleading because the 200 polling stations in 2012 were “precinct-specific”, while the 60 this year were so-called “voting centers,” where voters could cast ballots anywhere in the county. Jurisdictions in 33 states are moving to or already use a vote-center model, she says, which are attempts by local election officials to help voters who appear at incorrect precinct voting locations.

“This alleviates all of that,” she says. “People could go anywhere, but it also meant they had to have much larger facilities. So they had fewer number of options on where they could get a facility large enough to be a vote center that would allow them in.”

Patrick’s job from late 2004 through the end of the Voting Rights Act coverage in 2013 was to make sure Maricopa County voting decisions complied with federal laws. She said her former county election colleagues “were all very disappointed when the Voting Rights Act enforcement went away because it kind of protected them from the crazy legislature down the street.”

The question remains why county level officials limited the number of vote-centers to just 60, but Patrick suggests it might have to do with finding locations around the county that could accommodate large groups of people and would likely have occurred under the old Voting Rights Act requirements, despite suggestions to the contrary. She admitted, though, that there’s a context for concerns about discrimination.

“It’s a heightened environment, without a doubt,” she says. “Anything that doesn’t go absolutely perfectly is going to be viewed as some sort of a tactic. Now when it comes to things like legislation, that’s quite possible that there are legislative acts that are done down the street that maybe have that sort of intent, but that’s certainly not the case at the local level.”

The Arizona Republic called the entire situation an “outrage” in an editorial Wednesday, and added that the decision to switch to a vote-center model was a “cost-cutting measure” that was “badly bungled” by county election officials who “did not account for such things as high turnout or parking.”

Whoever’s to blame, the net result was the same: thousands of people stood in line for hours, some of whom gave up and ended up not voting. Erika Andiola, the national press secretary for Latino outreach for the Sanders campaign, said she heard from her volunteers about people leaving lines and waiting hours and hours to vote.

“I’m pretty sure that other campaigns were concerned,” Andiola says. “It’s not just about Bernie Sanders, but it’s really about Arizona. How can you have such a big number of people who are trying to participate in our elections that are treated this way? We want to encourage voting, we don’t want to discourage voting. That’s definitely not something we should be doing in any state.”

See the article here: 

The Election in Arizona Was a Mess

Posted in alternative energy, Anchor, Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Scotts, solar, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Election in Arizona Was a Mess

5 Great Environmental Documentaries

The Academy Awards shine a spotlight on the best movies made in any given year. Here’s a list of five of the best environmental documentaries made in 2015.

The Human Experiment
This documentary tells the stories of three families who believe their health has been seriously compromised by toxic chemicals circulating willy-nilly in our environment. Produced and narrated by Academy Award-winner Sean Penn, the filmexamines what we know (and dont know) about the connection betweenskyrocketing rates of cancer, autism, infertility, asthma, and other diseases and the chemicals we encounter in such common household items as plastic baby and water bottles, fragrances in perfumes and cosmetics, and chemicals in shampoos, deodorant and cleaning products.

Companies that produce and use toxic chemicals do not need to prove they dont pose a human health risk. That’s because the federal Toxic Substances Control Act, called TSCA, places the burden of proof on the consumer, not the company producing the product. The film makes a powerful argument for strengthening federal laws to get dangerous compounds off the market and away from the people they can hurt. You can read the full review on Care2 here.

Stink
Stink also examines the impact toxic chemicals can have on our lives, but from the point of view of a father who is shocked when the new pajamas he buys for his two daughters stink so badly from the flame retardants they’ve been doused in that the girls can’t wear them. The father, who is the filmmaker Jon Whelan, goes on a quest to figure out why so many toxic chemicals are allowed into our world. He also tries to figure out whether his wife’s death from breast cancer could somehow be connected to chemicals she was exposed to. The film is gripping, even devastating in parts, but also lights a fire under the viewer, as the filmmaker makes it clear that we citizens must support stronger legislation to reduce toxic exposures.

Mislead: America’s Secret Epidemic
Tamara Rubin founded the Lead Safe America Foundation when she realized her own children were lead poisoned. Then she decided to make a movie about the lead poisoning crisis that is making so many people, specifically children, sick. The resulting documentary, titled MisLEAD: America’s Secret Epidemic, makes a powerful case that lead poisoning is dangerous, pervasive and must be stopped.

Tamara and her crew highlight 17 different families, all of whom are trying to help children already lead poisoned while preventing the situation from getting worse. The documentary draws a direct line between the “sudden, alarming” rise in the number of American children suffering from ADD, ADHD, Autism Spectrum symptoms and similar neurological disorders and children’s exposure to lead. These disabilities cost society more than $50 billion annually, says Lead Safe America. Especially in light of the terrible crisis facing the families living in Flint, Michigan whose children have been poisoned by lead in drinking water, the film couldn’t be more timely.

National Parks Adventure 3D
For a completely different kind of film, don’t missMacGillivray Freeman’s National Parks Adventure in 3D. Narrated by Academy Award winner Robert Redford, the movie takes you on an IMAX adventure into what Redford calls the “most awe-inspiring, jaw-dropping places that belong to us all.”

Yosemite, Yellowstone, the Everglades, the Redwoods, the Grand Canyon, Arches and Canyonlands are among the nation’s crown jewels featured in this film, all perfectly suited to the giant-screen cinematographic adventure IMAX provides. If you liked some ofMacGillivray Freeman’s other Great Adventure Films including “Everest,” “Dolphins,” “Journey Into Amazing Caves” and “Grand Canyon Adventure” you’ll probably love this one, too.

Short of visiting a national park yourself, this may be one of the best ways to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the creation of the national park system, which occurs on August 25, 2016.

My Life as a Turkey
Writer and naturalist Joe Hutto quite unexpectedly found himself raising 13endangered wild turkeys in the flatlands of Florida from the moment they hatched. Hutton told the talefirst in his book “Illumination in the Flatwoods.” Now , he brings it to life in this poignant film, and it’s not one you want to miss.

“Day after day, for over a year, I saw no one – except my family,” he says as the movie opens, Joe walkingshrouded in mist and surrounded by his feathered youngsters. “It was a family like none you know. But I’m a mother, it seems, and these are my children.”

Hutto spent each day amblingdeep into the Everglades with these birds, roosting with them, taking them foraging and even learning to speak their “language.” In the process, he says, “they revealed their charming curiosity and surprising intellect.”

The day came for Hutto the way it comes for all parents, and he had to let his brood go off on their own. Keep some tissues handy when you watch this sweet, lovely film.

For more film options, check out the offerings at the D.C. Environmental Film Festivalor the Jackson Hole Wildlife Film Festival.

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

More here: 

5 Great Environmental Documentaries

Posted in alo, Citizen, Crown, Dolphin, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 5 Great Environmental Documentaries

Sanders Talks Up His Small Game on the Eve of His First Big Test

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

For a presidential candidate aiming to come away with a big upset in Monday’s Iowa caucuses, Bernie Sanders closed out his final night before the the first votes are cast by wholeheartedly embracing his small-ball approach to campaigning. His final Iowa rally, to a crowd of 1,700 at Grand View University in Des Moines on Sunday, was introduced by a string of not-quite-A-list actors and musicians: Richmond Arquette (apparently there are as many Arquettes as Baldwins), Connor Paolo (Serena’s obnoxious younger brother on Gossip Girl), Josh Hutcherson (Peeta in The Hunger Games), and Foster the People.

The crowd played along, but didn’t really perk up until Sanders himself showed up. The senator from Vermont rolled through a 50-minute stump speech tackling the full range of his usual points—Walmart should pay a fair wage, health care should be run by the government, banks should have to pay for free public colleges—but took a little time early in his spiel to boast about how much less money he raised from big outside donors than his opponent, Hillary Clinton.

“My opponent yesterday announced that she had received some $45 million for her super-PAC,” Sanders said. “We announced that we zero dollars for our super-PAC.” (He didn’t mention the money that unions have spent on his campaign.) He continued, “We announced that we have received throughout this campaign—and this is so unbelievable, never in a million years would I have thought it possible—that we have received up to now 3.2 million individual contributions. That is more contributions than any candidate up to this point of a campaign in the history of the United States of America.”

Small ball does often win big games. Monday will reveal whether it’s sufficient to give Sanders the first big win of the race to the Democratic nomination.

View original article: 

Sanders Talks Up His Small Game on the Eve of His First Big Test

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Oster, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Sanders Talks Up His Small Game on the Eve of His First Big Test

Prosecutors Dealt a Setback in Trial of Rand Paul Aides

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

An Iowa judge dealt a setback to prosecutors who have accused several Paul family political operatives of breaking campaign finance laws during Ron Paul’s 2012 presidential campaign. The judge ruled on Friday that all the charges filed against John Tate, a longtime Paul family operative who worked for both Ron and Rand Paul and for groups tied to the family’s political causes, should be dismissed. During the 2012 election, Tate was in charge of America’s Liberty PAC, a pro-Rand Paul super-PAC endorsed by the Kentucky senator. Several of the charges against Jesse Benton, who is married to Ron Paul’s granddaughter and also involved with America’s Liberty PAC, were also dropped. But Benton and a third Paul lieutenant, Dimitri Kesari, are still both scheduled to go to trial next week.

This case focuses on these operatives’ roles running the 2012 Ron Paul campaign and an apparent plan to pay an Iowa state senator to switch his endorsement from Michele Bachmann to Ron Paul. The state senator, Kent Sorenson, initially denied there was a scheme to pay him to back Ron Paul, but eventually he admitted that he took money from the Paul campaign through a third party (to cover the campaign’s tracks). He pleaded guilty last year to federal campaign finance charges and is awaiting sentencing. On Friday, federal judge John Jarvey, dismissed all the charges against Tate and all but one of the charges against Benton, saying that in presenting charges to the grand jury, prosecutors improperly included accusations that Benton and Tate lied about their involvement in the case during meetings with investigators and prosecutors.

The judge’s decision was apparently based on complaints by Benton and Tate’s respective lawyers that the government convinced a grand jury to indict them by using statements the men made when they were under the impression that prosecutors wouldn’t use these remarks against them. According to court documents, last summer, before a grand jury was convened, the two men met, separately, with investigators and prosecutors in what is known as “proffer sessions”—meetings in which the subject of the interview is usually given some immunity and a promise the government won’t use what they tell investigators against them. The one instance in which statements made during a proffer session can be used to prosecute the interviewee is when the government prosecutes the person directly for making false statements to federal investigators. The charges against Tate and Benton that were dismissed today were related to conspiracy and campaign finance violations. The judge ruled that it was improper for prosecutors to bring up what Benton and Tate said in the proffer sessions when accusing them of those crimes.

Benton is still charged with making false statements to federal investigators and Kesari still faces six charges relating to the case, including conspiracy and campaign finance charges. Prosecutors also claim he tried to convince Sorenson to not cooperate with investigators.

Neither Benton nor Tate’s attorney responded to requests for comment, but Peter Carr, a spokesman for the Department of Justice, said new charges may still be filed against Tate and Benton.

“The government is free to proceed to trial—and informed the court today that it will proceed to trial—on the remaining counts pertaining to Benton and Kesari,” Carr said. “The decision regarding the dismissed counts will be made at a later date post trial.”

View article: 

Prosecutors Dealt a Setback in Trial of Rand Paul Aides

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, ProPublica, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Prosecutors Dealt a Setback in Trial of Rand Paul Aides

All of Our Negotiating Partners Think the Iran Deal Is Just Fine

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The New York Times reports that the Iran deal is just a big yawn in Europe:

The matter is settled, according to Camille Grand, director of the Strategic Research Foundation in Paris and an expert on nuclear nonproliferation. “In Europe, you don’t have a constituency against the deal,” he said. “In France, I can’t think of a single politician or member of the expert community who has spoken against it, including some of us who were critical during the negotiations.”

Mr. Grand said the final agreement was better than he had expected. “I was surprised by the depth and the quality of the deal,” he said. “The hawks are satisfied, and the doves don’t have an argument.”

No arguments? I got your arguments right here. 24 days! Self-inspections! $150 billion! Death to America! Neville Chamberlain!

If the Europeans have no arguments against the deal, they aren’t even trying. They should try calling the Republican Party for a set of serious, detailed, and principled talking points.

Link – 

All of Our Negotiating Partners Think the Iran Deal Is Just Fine

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on All of Our Negotiating Partners Think the Iran Deal Is Just Fine

Louisiana Has Some of the Weakest Gun Laws in the Country

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Thursday night, 59-year-old John Russell Houser of Alabama walked into the Grand Theater in Lafayette, Louisiana, with a handgun and shot into a crowd, killing two and injuring nine more. At a press conference Friday, Democratic state Rep. Terry Landry Sr. called for stricter gun laws in Louisiana, saying, “It’s our job as legislators to close the loopholes in these gun laws.” Indeed, according to the National Rife Association, Louisiana has one of the most open gun policies around—from its unabashedly pro-gun governor to its concealed carry law. A 2014 report by the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence rated the state as having “the weakest gun laws in the country.”

Here’s what you need to know about gun law in Louisiana:

Gun owners don’t have to obtain a permit to purchase guns. Buyers don’t have to register their firearms, and they don’t need a license to possess them. State law requires a concealed carry permit for handguns, but there is no permit required to carry rifles or shotguns.
State law only restricts two kinds of people from possessing guns: those 17 and under, or those convicted of certain violent crimes (until a decade has passed since the completion of the sentence, probation, parole, or suspension of a sentence).
The state has enacted “castle doctrine”, meaning deadly force is considered justifiable in a court of law to defend against an intruder in a person’s home. The Louisiana state legislature also passed a “Stand Your Ground” law in 2006, stating that anyone in a place “where he or she has a right,” including public spaces, is not obligated “to retreat” if faced with a threat and “may stand his or her ground and meet force with force.” (Check out our map of how quickly “Stand Your Ground” laws spread across the United States).
Firearms may be stored in locked, privately owned motor vehicles. Louisiana is one of 22 states with similar policies that allow guns to be left in the office parking lot.
Gun owners have the right to carry in restaurants.
According to a 2012 state constitutional amendment, “the right of each citizen to keep and bear arms is fundamental and shall not be infringed” and “any restriction on this right” will be met with maximum skepticism from the courts. The amendment, which was heavily backed by Gov. Jindal, also removed language that would allow the legislature to “prohibit the carrying of weapons concealed on a person.” In a written statement, Jindal argued: “We are adopting the strongest, most iron-clad, constitutional protection for law-abiding gun owners. It’s our own Second Amendment, if you will.”

Given these laws, it’s no surprise that nearly half of Louisiana households own a gun. Unfortunately, the state also sees high levels of armed violence: According to a Mother Jones investigation, the state has the country’s highest gun homicide rate—9.4 per 100,000 residents. And that gun violence has cost each Louisiana resident at least $1,333 a year.

View post – 

Louisiana Has Some of the Weakest Gun Laws in the Country

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Louisiana Has Some of the Weakest Gun Laws in the Country

The Real Reason to Worry About GMOs

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In a recent column, the New York Times‘ Mark Bittman makes an important point about the controversy around genetically modified foods. “To date there’s little credible evidence that any food grown with genetic engineering techniques is dangerous to human health,” he writes. Yet the way the technology has been used—mainly, to engineer crops that can withstand herbicides—is deeply problematic, he argues.

Here’s why I think Bittman’s point is crucial. The below chart, from the pro-biotech International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications, gives a snapshot of what types of GMO crops farmers were planting as of 2012. In more recent reports, the ISAAA doesn’t break out its data in the same way, but it’s a fair assumption that things are roughly similar three years later, given that no GMO blockbusters have entered the market since.

Chart: The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications,

If you add up all the herbicide-tolerant crops on the list, you find that about 69 percent of global GM acres are planted with crops engineered to withstand herbicides. But that’s an undercount, because the GM products listed as “stacked traits” are engineered to repel insects (the Bt trait) and to withstand herbicides. Adding those acres in, the grand total comes to something like 84 percent of global biotech acres devoted to crops that can flourish when doused with weed killers—chemicals that are sold by the very same companies that sell the GMO seeds.

As Bittman points out, almost all of the herbicide-tolerant crops on the market to date have been engineered to resist a single herbicide, glyphosate. And weeds have evolved to resist that herbicide, forcing farmers to apply heavier doses and or added older, more toxic chemicals to the mix.

Rather than reconsider the wisdom of committing tens of millions of acres to crops developed to resist a single herbicide, the industry plans to double down: Monsanto and rival Dow will both be marketing crops next year engineered to withstand both glyphosate and more-toxic herbicides—even though scientists like Penn State University’s David Mortensen are convinced that the new products are “likely to increase the severity of resistant weeds” and “facilitate a significant increase in herbicide use.”

Meanwhile, unhappily, the World Health Organization has recently decreed glyphosate, sold by Monsanto under the Roundup brand name, a “probable carcinogen”—a designation Monsanto is vigorously trying to get rescinded.

So, given that 20 years after GM crops first appeared on farm fields, something like four-fifths of global biotech acres are still devoted to herbicide-tolerant crops, Bittman’s unease about how the technology has been deployed seems warranted. It’s true that genetically altered apples and potatoes that don’t brown as rapidly when they’re sliced will soon hit the market. They may prove to be a benign development. But it’s doubtful that they’ll spread over enough acres to rival herbicide-tolerant crops anytime soon. And humanity has thrived for millennia despite the scourge of fast-browning apples and potatoes. The same isn’t true for ever-increasing deluges of toxic herbicides.

Original article: 

The Real Reason to Worry About GMOs

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, organic, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Real Reason to Worry About GMOs

FBI Director Delivers Powerful Call for Change in Police Race Relations

Mother Jones

In a rare and candid speech on Thursday, FBI director James Comey urged police officers to begin engaging in honest conversations about broken race relations in America, saying it was time for officers to stop resorting to “lazy mental shortcuts” that have too often lead to the mistreatment of minorities.

“Those of us in law enforcement must re-double our efforts to resist bias and prejudice,” Comey said in an address to Georgetown University. “We must better understand the people we serve and protect—by trying to know, deep in our gut, what it feels like to be a law-abiding young black man walking on the street and encountering law enforcement. We must understand how that young man may see us.”

The speech follows the high-profile police killings of two unarmed black men, Michael Brown and Eric Garner, and the widespread anger expressed over the lack of grand jury indictments against the officers in both deaths. The fatal shootings sparked massive protests across the country, with demonstrators demanding for police reform.

On Thursday, Comey referred to both Brown and Garner, along with the two NYPD officers who were shot execution-style in their patrol car in December. Calling their deaths a “crossroads,” Comey said it was time for law enforcement agencies to acknowledge that a large portion of police history “is not pretty” and rife with instances of persisting, unconscious prejudices.

Comey’s rationale aligns with psychological studies indicating that even in the absence of overt racist views, individuals–particularly police officers–often act with bias, especially in instance where a split-second decision is required.

“If we can’t help our latent biases, we can help our behavior in response to those instinctive reactions, which is why we work to design systems and processes that overcome that very human part of us all,” he said. “Although the research may be unsettling, what we do next is what matters most.”

Link: 

FBI Director Delivers Powerful Call for Change in Police Race Relations

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, Mop, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on FBI Director Delivers Powerful Call for Change in Police Race Relations