truthout--2020-09-09--Department of Justice Moves to Defend Trump in Rape Accuser’s Defamation Suit

The U.S. Department of Justice ( DOJ ) took the unprecedented step on Tuesday evening of seeking to defend President Trump against a private lawsuit by advice columnist E. Jean Carroll who has accused Trump of sexual assault .
Carroll sued Trump for defamation after he denied ever having met her and accused her of lying .
Numerous legal analysts immediately decried the move as a “ debasement ” of the DOJ by Attorney General William Barr .
“ So now Barr has decided ( 1 ) that Trump somehow was acting *in his official capacity as president* when he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accusing him of sexual assault , and ( 2 ) taxpayers should foot the bill for Trump ’ s defense , ” former federal prosecutor and CNN legal analyst Elie Honig said in a tweet .
“ Another utter debasement of DOJ by Barr.
” In an attempt to justify its intervention in the private defamation lawsuit , the Justice Department argued in new court filings that Trump was acting in his official capacity as chief executive of the U.S. government when he said Carroll was lying about him having perpetrated sexual assault @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who was also the former advice columnist for ELLE , published a book in June 2019 in which she accuses Trump of having raped her in the 1990s .
In the same month , Trump denied the allegations , mocked her and called her a liar .
In response , Carroll filed a defamation lawsuit against Trump last November .
Carroll is seeking to collect DNA evidence from Trump to support her allegations .
Trump has claimed the two never met , but a photograph from 1987 shows them both in attendance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a state judge ruled that Carroll ’ s defamation suit can continue forward , and that she can continue to seek the DNA evidence from Trump .
According to Carroll ’ s lawyer Robbie Kaplan , this week would have been the deadline for the president to appeal that decision .
Instead , Trump “ enlisted the U.S. Department of Justice to replace his private lawyers and argue that when he lied about sexually assaulting our client… .
He was acting in his official capacity as President of the United States , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ To make that argument , the DOJ is citing the Federal Tort Claims Act ( FTCA ) , using language from that law to say that the matter belongs in federal courts instead of a New York state court .
“ Because President Trump was acting within the scope of his office or employment at the time of the incident out of which the plaintiff ’ s claim arose , the United States will file a motion to substitute itself for President Trump in this action for any claim for which the FTCA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ court filings said .
The final decision on whether the DOJ can intervene on the case , and whether it will be moved from the New York state court to the federal court system , will ultimately be up to a federal judge to decide .
The move is a highly unusual one , as the DOJ is supposed to involve itself in matters of federal law , not private lawsuits that may impact government employees , including the president .
Joyce Alene , the former U.S. Attorney in Birmingham during the Obama @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many legal analysts who have decried the DOJ ’ s intervention on behalf of Trump .
“ DOJ gives legal representation to fed ’ l employees sued for actions w/in the scope of their employment , ” Alene tweeted .
“ So , we ’ re now footing the bill for Trump ’ s defense , based on the ludicrous claim he was acting as POTUS when he called  @ ejeancarroll a liar.
” Carroll herself spoke out about the court filing by the DOJ on Tuesday night .
“ TRUMP HURLS @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
“ Just when @ realDonaldTrump is required to produce documents and DNA in discovery , he sics the DOJ on us .
”

Many experts are criticizing the move as an inappropriate use of federal resources for Trump’s personal legal matters.
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) took the unprecedented step on Tuesday evening of seeking to defend President Trump against a private lawsuit by advice columnist E. Jean Carroll who has accused Trump of sexual assault. Carroll sued Trump for defamation after he denied ever having met her and accused her of lying.
Numerous legal analysts immediately decried the move as a “debasement” of the DOJ by Attorney General William Barr.
“So now Barr has decided (1) that Trump somehow was acting *in his official capacity as president* when he called E. Jean Carroll a liar for accusing him of sexual assault, and (2) taxpayers should foot the bill for Trump’s defense,” former federal prosecutor and CNN legal analyst Elie Honig said in a tweet. “Another utter debasement of DOJ by Barr.”
In an attempt to justify its intervention in the private defamation lawsuit, the Justice Department argued in new court filings that Trump was acting in his official capacity as chief executive of the U.S. government when he said Carroll was lying about him having perpetrated sexual assault against her in the 1990s.
Carroll, who was also the former advice columnist for ELLE, published a book in June 2019 in which she accuses Trump of having raped her in the 1990s. In the same month, Trump denied the allegations, mocked her and called her a liar. In response, Carroll filed a defamation lawsuit against Trump last November.
Carroll is seeking to collect DNA evidence from Trump to support her allegations. Trump has claimed the two never met, but a photograph from 1987 shows them both in attendance at the same party.
Last month, a state judge ruled that Carroll’s defamation suit can continue forward, and that she can continue to seek the DNA evidence from Trump. According to Carroll’s lawyer Robbie Kaplan, this week would have been the deadline for the president to appeal that decision.
Instead, Trump “enlisted the U.S. Department of Justice to replace his private lawyers and argue that when he lied about sexually assaulting our client…. He was acting in his official capacity as President of the United States,” Kaplan said in a statement.
To make that argument, the DOJ is citing the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), using language from that law to say that the matter belongs in federal courts instead of a New York state court.
“Because President Trump was acting within the scope of his office or employment at the time of the incident out of which the plaintiff’s claim arose, the United States will file a motion to substitute itself for President Trump in this action for any claim for which the FTCA provides the exclusive remedy,” DOJ court filings said.
The final decision on whether the DOJ can intervene on the case, and whether it will be moved from the New York state court to the federal court system, will ultimately be up to a federal judge to decide.
The move is a highly unusual one, as the DOJ is supposed to involve itself in matters of federal law, not private lawsuits that may impact government employees, including the president.
Joyce Alene, the former U.S. Attorney in Birmingham during the Obama administration, is just one of the many legal analysts who have decried the DOJ’s intervention on behalf of Trump.
“DOJ gives legal representation to fed’l employees sued for actions w/in the scope of their employment,” Alene tweeted. “So, we’re now footing the bill for Trump’s defense, based on the ludicrous claim he was acting as POTUS when he called @ejeancarroll a liar.”
Carroll herself spoke out about the court filing by the DOJ on Tuesday night. “TRUMP HURLS BILL BARR AT ME,” she said. “Just when @realDonaldTrump is required to produce documents and DNA in discovery, he sics the DOJ on us.”
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-09-09--Trump Campaign Appears to Be Hiding Large-Dollar Payments to Top Staff

The Trump campaign faces a cash crunch , having spent about $ 800 million of the roughly $ 1.1 billion it raised since January 2019 .
At the same time , it appears to be hiding payments to top officials charged with cracking down on profligacy .
Salon reported last week that the Trump campaign has not disclosed any payments to senior adviser Jason Miller or new campaign manager Bill Stepien , who took over Brad Parscale ’ s role in July , according to mandatory Federal Election Commission filings .
The report cited court documents showing that the campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ top campaign strategist , as much as $ 35,000 a month .
That is effectually a $ 420,000 salary , or more than the presidency pays .
The campaign reports salary payments to chief of staff Stephanie Alexander and senior adviser Katrina Pierson , each of whom earn $ 20,000 a month .
However , it does not appear to issue similar reports for COO Jeff DeWit or senior advisers Kim Guilfoyle , Bob Paduchik , Bill Shine , and Lara Trump , federal records show .
By comparison , Democratic rival Joe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bi-monthly payroll disbursements to campaign manager Greg Schultz , totaling about $ 7,700 a month .
It is unclear how much Stepien makes ; the Trump campaign did not reply to Salon ’ s requests for comment .
But a New York Times report revealed over the weekend that Stepien had taken a pay cut when he accepted the position , after which President Donald Trump expressed glee .
( The campaign pays one of Parscale ’ s firms , Parscale Strategies , more than $ 47,700 a month , per filings .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Parscale in July , the campaign has imposed a series of belt-tightening measures that have reshaped initiatives , including hiring practices , travel and the advertising budget , ” the Times reported .
However , the details of those new hiring practices remain unclear .
The campaign brought Miller aboard in June , following six weeks of lucrative lobbying work for two clients who paid him between $ 15,000 and $ 24,000 apiece over that time , Salon previously reported .
Before that , court filings obtained by Salon showed that Miller was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about $ 20,000 of which came from Steve Bannon ’ s nonprofit Citizens of the American Republic .
Investigators are now eyeing the entity in a federal money laundering case against Bannon and three co-conspirators .
“ We held on to cash to make sure that we ’ ll have the firepower that we need ” for the fall , Miller told the Times .
Though the Trump campaign does not disclose payments to Miller or Stepien , it does disclose payments to Jamestown Associates , a media company founded in New Jersey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was once a top executive and partner there .
Stepien also has ties to Jamestown Associates , through former New Jersey Gov .
Chris Christie .
The Republican ousted Stepien as his campaign chief in the wake of the “ Bridgegate ” scandal but went on to praise his elevation to the top slot in Trump ’ s operation this year .
FEC filings show that the campaign has made several payments to Jamestown this year , in the range of approximately $ 7,500 and $ 45,500 through June .
In July , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 78,394 payment on July 13 and a $ 133,800 payment on July 28 .
Miller joined the campaign in June , and Stepien was promoted by the campaign on July 15 .
The campaign reports that the disbursements were for “ video production services.
” When asked if the missing payroll receipts for two top-level officials , including the campaign manager , seemed unusual , Brendan Fischer , the director of the Federal Reform Program at the Campaign Legal Center , told Salon , “ It doesn ’ t surprise me at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ millions of dollars in payments to personnel and vendors by routing the money through LLCs created or managed by senior Trump campaign officials.
” The CLC recently filed an FEC complaint alleging that the Trump campaign had unlawfully hidden at least $ 170 million in payments through shell companies , thereby keeping its spending a secret form the public , law enforcement and its own donors .
Some of those hidden payments have allegedly gone towards salaries — such as to Kimberly Guilfoyle and Lara Trump — and were made through an entity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also paid out a reported $ 2.3 million to the president ’ s private businesses .
“ This is illegal , ” Fischer told Salon at the time .
This spring , a report suggested that Parscale paid Guilfoyle and Lara Trump $ 180,000 a year , roughly equal to a top White House salary .
Miller ’ s recent court filings suggest that his campaign salary might be more than double that amount .
( Salon has not independently verified that report , which cited “ top Republicans with knowledge of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s donors contribute in small dollar amounts .

The campaign has not reported payroll payments to several top officials, including its new campaign manager.
The Trump campaign faces a cash crunch, having spent about $800 million of the roughly $1.1 billion it raised since January 2019. At the same time, it appears to be hiding payments to top officials charged with cracking down on profligacy.
Salon reported last week that the Trump campaign has not disclosed any payments to senior adviser Jason Miller or new campaign manager Bill Stepien, who took over Brad Parscale’s role in July, according to mandatory Federal Election Commission filings.
The report cited court documents showing that the campaign appears to be paying Miller, a top campaign strategist, as much as $35,000 a month. That is effectually a $420,000 salary, or more than the presidency pays.
The campaign reports salary payments to chief of staff Stephanie Alexander and senior adviser Katrina Pierson, each of whom earn $20,000 a month. However, it does not appear to issue similar reports for COO Jeff DeWit or senior advisers Kim Guilfoyle, Bob Paduchik, Bill Shine, and Lara Trump, federal records show.
By comparison, Democratic rival Joe Biden’s presidential campaign reports regular bi-monthly payroll disbursements to campaign manager Greg Schultz, totaling about $7,700 a month.
It is unclear how much Stepien makes; the Trump campaign did not reply to Salon’s requests for comment. But a New York Times report revealed over the weekend that Stepien had taken a pay cut when he accepted the position, after which President Donald Trump expressed glee. (The campaign pays one of Parscale’s firms, Parscale Strategies, more than $47,700 a month, per filings.)
“Since Bill Stepien replaced Mr. Parscale in July, the campaign has imposed a series of belt-tightening measures that have reshaped initiatives, including hiring practices, travel and the advertising budget,” the Times reported.
However, the details of those new hiring practices remain unclear. The campaign brought Miller aboard in June, following six weeks of lucrative lobbying work for two clients who paid him between $15,000 and $24,000 apiece over that time, Salon previously reported.
Before that, court filings obtained by Salon showed that Miller was making nearly $60,000 a month, about $20,000 of which came from Steve Bannon’s nonprofit Citizens of the American Republic. Investigators are now eyeing the entity in a federal money laundering case against Bannon and three co-conspirators.
“We held on to cash to make sure that we’ll have the firepower that we need” for the fall, Miller told the Times.
Though the Trump campaign does not disclose payments to Miller or Stepien, it does disclose payments to Jamestown Associates, a media company founded in New Jersey which specializes in campaign publicity. Miller was once a top executive and partner there.
Stepien also has ties to Jamestown Associates, through former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. The Republican ousted Stepien as his campaign chief in the wake of the “Bridgegate” scandal but went on to praise his elevation to the top slot in Trump’s operation this year.
FEC filings show that the campaign has made several payments to Jamestown this year, in the range of approximately $7,500 and $45,500 through June. In July, those payments increased significantly — including a $78,394 payment on July 13 and a $133,800 payment on July 28.
Miller joined the campaign in June, and Stepien was promoted by the campaign on July 15. The campaign reports that the disbursements were for “video production services.”
When asked if the missing payroll receipts for two top-level officials, including the campaign manager, seemed unusual, Brendan Fischer, the director of the Federal Reform Program at the Campaign Legal Center, told Salon, “It doesn’t surprise me at all. The Trump campaign has disguised millions of dollars in payments to personnel and vendors by routing the money through LLCs created or managed by senior Trump campaign officials.”
The CLC recently filed an FEC complaint alleging that the Trump campaign had unlawfully hidden at least $170 million in payments through shell companies, thereby keeping its spending a secret form the public, law enforcement and its own donors. Some of those hidden payments have allegedly gone towards salaries — such as to Kimberly Guilfoyle and Lara Trump — and were made through an entity controlled by Parscale.
The campaign has also paid out a reported $2.3 million to the president’s private businesses.
“This is illegal,” Fischer told Salon at the time.
This spring, a report suggested that Parscale paid Guilfoyle and Lara Trump $180,000 a year, roughly equal to a top White House salary. Miller’s recent court filings suggest that his campaign salary might be more than double that amount. (Salon has not independently verified that report, which cited “top Republicans with knowledge of the payments.”)
A great many of Trump’s donors contribute in small dollar amounts.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-09-09--GOP Proposes Massive Coal Industry Handout, No Direct COVID Relief Payments

While excluding any funding for direct cash payments to Americans struggling to afford basic necessities amid the Covid-19 pandemic and resulting economic crisis , the purportedly “ targeted ” relief legislation put forth by Senate Republicans Tuesday calls for a $ 161 million handout to the coal industry — a proposal Sen. Bernie Sanders condemned as “ pathetic.
” “ Senate Republicans tell us we can ’ t afford to give $ 2,000 a month to the working class during the economic crisis , ” tweeted the Vermont senator , but “ the Covid-19 ‘ relief ’ bill they just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ welfare to the coal industry during a climate emergency.
” Sanders pointed to a provision buried in the 285-page GOP bill ( pdf ) — titled the Delivering Immediate Relief to America ’ s Families , Schools , and Small Businesses Act — directing the Department of Energy to “ carry out a program under which the secretary shall develop advanced separation technologies for the extraction and recovery of rare earth elements and minerals from coal and coal byproducts.
” The massive coal industry handout was just one of many provisions crammed in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that progressive advocacy groups and Democratic lawmakers denounced as unacceptable .
Lisa Gilbert , executive vice president of Public Citizen , said in a statement that the new legislation spotlights the extent to which “ Senate Republicans ’ priorities are completely upside down , ” pointing to the measure ’ s proposal of a sweeping liability shield for corporations that expose workers and customers to Covid-19 .
“ They ’ re against providing state and local governments with critical aid to fund public services and schools but in favor of granting businesses immunity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” said Gilbert .
“ The pandemic is already widening social and economic divisions .
Shielding corporations from accountability will endanger workers , consumers , and patients , and make the pandemic even worse.
” The price tag of the Republican proposal was pegged at around $ 300 billion , making the bill dramatically smaller than the $ 1 trillion plan the Senate GOP rolled out in July — a proposal that was also deemed woefully inadequate to meet the needs of tens of millions of hungry , jobless , and eviction-prone Americans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 300-per-week federal boost to unemployment benefits , just half of the $ 600 weekly supplement Republicans allowed to expire at the end of July ; $ 105 billion for education and tax credits for “ private-school scholarships “ ; $ 250 billion for the Paycheck Protection Program ; and forgiveness of a $ 10 billion loan to the U.S .
Postal Service approved under a previous relief package .
In a speech on the Senate floor late Tuesday , Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) said the Senate will vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is widely expected to fail due to lack of Democratic support and divisions within the Republican caucus .
“ Every senator who has said they want a bipartisan outcome for the country will have the chance to vote , for everyone to see , ” said McConnell .
“ Senators will vote this week .
And the American people will be watching.
” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer ( D-N.Y. ) said McConnell ’ s push for a rapid vote on a Republican bill that ’ s “ certain to fail ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I have ever seen in politics.
” “ This new emaciated Republican Covid proposal fails to meet the needs of the American people , ” Schumer tweeted .
Kyle Herrig , president of watchdog group Accountable.US , said in a statement late Tuesday that the Senate GOP ’ s latest plan is “ a slap in the face to the millions of Americans struggling to provide for their families during this crisis.
” “ Without adequate support for people who have lost their jobs or sufficient funds to help small businesses stay afloat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s clear that lawmakers are more interested in helping the president and his allies with this bill than the workers who need support most .
”

While excluding any funding for direct cash payments to Americans struggling to afford basic necessities amid the Covid-19 pandemic and resulting economic crisis, the purportedly “targeted” relief legislation put forth by Senate Republicans Tuesday calls for a $161 million handout to the coal industry — a proposal Sen. Bernie Sanders condemned as “pathetic.”
“Senate Republicans tell us we can’t afford to give $2,000 a month to the working class during the economic crisis,” tweeted the Vermont senator, but “the Covid-19 ‘relief’ bill they just released provides $161 million in corporate welfare to the coal industry during a climate emergency.”
Sanders pointed to a provision buried in the 285-page GOP bill (pdf) — titled the Delivering Immediate Relief to America’s Families, Schools, and Small Businesses Act — directing the Department of Energy to “carry out a program under which the secretary shall develop advanced separation technologies for the extraction and recovery of rare earth elements and minerals from coal and coal byproducts.”
The massive coal industry handout was just one of many provisions crammed in the so-called “skinny” relief bill that progressive advocacy groups and Democratic lawmakers denounced as unacceptable.
Lisa Gilbert, executive vice president of Public Citizen, said in a statement that the new legislation spotlights the extent to which “Senate Republicans’ priorities are completely upside down,” pointing to the measure’s proposal of a sweeping liability shield for corporations that expose workers and customers to Covid-19.
“They’re against providing state and local governments with critical aid to fund public services and schools but in favor of granting businesses immunity from lawsuits related to the coronavirus,” said Gilbert. “The pandemic is already widening social and economic divisions. Shielding corporations from accountability will endanger workers, consumers, and patients, and make the pandemic even worse.”
Imagine watching your citizens plead for relief from an economically devastating pandemic and thinking: "Quick! We must grant businesses immunity from lawsuits related to the virus!" This is Mitch McConnell's COVID bill. — Public Citizen (@Public_Citizen) September 8, 2020
The price tag of the Republican proposal was pegged at around $300 billion, making the bill dramatically smaller than the $1 trillion plan the Senate GOP rolled out in July — a proposal that was also deemed woefully inadequate to meet the needs of tens of millions of hungry, jobless, and eviction-prone Americans.
The new bill calls for a $300-per-week federal boost to unemployment benefits, just half of the $600 weekly supplement Republicans allowed to expire at the end of July; $105 billion for education and tax credits for “private-school scholarships“; $250 billion for the Paycheck Protection Program; and forgiveness of a $10 billion loan to the U.S. Postal Service approved under a previous relief package.
In a speech on the Senate floor late Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said the Senate will vote on the bill this week even though it is widely expected to fail due to lack of Democratic support and divisions within the Republican caucus.
“Every senator who has said they want a bipartisan outcome for the country will have the chance to vote, for everyone to see,” said McConnell. “Senators will vote this week. And the American people will be watching.”
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said McConnell’s push for a rapid vote on a Republican bill that’s “certain to fail” is “one of the cynical things I have ever seen in politics.”
“This new emaciated Republican Covid proposal fails to meet the needs of the American people,” Schumer tweeted.
Kyle Herrig, president of watchdog group Accountable.US, said in a statement late Tuesday that the Senate GOP’s latest plan is “a slap in the face to the millions of Americans struggling to provide for their families during this crisis.”
“Without adequate support for people who have lost their jobs or sufficient funds to help small businesses stay afloat,” added Herrig, “it’s clear that lawmakers are more interested in helping the president and his allies with this bill than the workers who need support most.”
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-09-09--Several Schools in Pennsylvania and Ohio Find Harmful Bacteria in Water Systems

As schools cautiously reopen for the fall semester , several have discovered potentially harmful bacteria in their water systems .
Parents are likely concerned about what this means for their children , and other districts may be checking their own water ’ s safety .
As researchers who investigate water quality in buildings , we warned earlier this year that the pandemic stay-at-home orders could allow bacteria and harmful metals to accumulate in water as it sat unused in buildings ’ pipes .
Some building managers looked for those problems as they reopened and found them .
More than 10 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ finding harmful bacteria in their plumbing .
Even the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , the nation ’ s health protection agency , discovered Legionella , the bacteria that causes Legionnaires ’ disease , in buildings it leases .
This presents potential health risks .
For schools , it means the long checklist for maintaining a safe learning environment should include water systems .
Luckily , there are simple steps that can minimize the risks .
Most schools our team interacts with do not check or flush their water pipes regularly .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in their plumbing for days , weeks or months .
This has been even longer during the pandemic .
When water use is low or has stopped , the water stagnates .
That can allow organisms like Legionella to grow and harmful metals to leach into the water , potentially making it unsafe to drink or use .
Some school buildings have more than 300 water use locations , such as gym showers , water fountains and sinks in classrooms , kitchens and restrooms .
Many locations go unused for long periods of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ session .
Large buildings can also have underlying problems with water temperature and movement that allow growth even without stagnation .
There are no federal requirements for most schools to test their drinking water .
Any testing for Legionella is voluntary , and there are no nationally regarded amounts of Legionella for when to take action , even if schools did test .
Testing for other contaminants like metals varies by state and is generally not required , unless the school itself is declared a public water system .
Who Is at Risk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ organisms can grow in pipes and devices like filters , heaters and cooling towers .
Finding Legionella in both cold and hot water systems is not that surprising .
We do not know if Legionella was present before the pandemic .
It may have been there last summer .
It may be there again next summer , too .
Multiple schools have dealt with Legionella in recent years .
In Ohio schools , Legionella testing seems to have been influenced by numerous pandemic-related water warnings , as well as a Legionnaires ’ disease @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s death at the same school one year earlier .
Most children are not in a high-risk group for Legionnaires ’ disease , a pneumonia-like respiratory illness , but faculty , staff and children with weakened immune systems may be .
It is also unknown how many children might get a less severe disease from Legionella called Pontiac fever , which has flu-like symptoms .
Infections are often linked to inhalation of aerosols when water splashes , like in showers or hot tubs , but also when flushing toilets or washing hands @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pose Risks Other health risks may also be building in school pipes .
Exposure to lead , which can leach from metal plumbing materials , has been linked to learning disabilities and cardiovascular effects .
Copper leaching from metal plumbing materials can cause acute illnesses like nausea and diarrhea .
A new study describes widespread copper contamination in an Indiana school just seven years after it was built .
The only reason problems were detected was because the school decided to test — it wasn ’ t required to do so .
Also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nickel and zinc .
In schools , we ’ re finding levels of these metals exceeding acute drinking water exposure limits .
Plumbing isn ’ t necessarily safe just because it ’ s built to code .
Schools should assess water safety every summer before students and staff return to the buildings .
All schools should have an active water management program .
These programs should address chemical and biological hazards , as well as schools ’ dramatic fluctuations in use during the year .
Educating parents , students and staff about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down water fountains decreases touchpoints where the coronavirus could spread , students and staff should not turn to water outlets that are not approved for drinking .
Sports team containers should not be filled at the shower .
Hot water systems do not have to undergo rigorous testing that potable cold water systems must pass .
Water management programs can identify regular preemptive actions like flushing water systems before school begins .
Flushing can help bring chemical disinfectant residual to every tap to limit growth .
Inexpensive hand-held disinfectant meters and thermometers can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ testing .
This testing could be more useful for understanding and managing water system problems than spot-testing for bacteria alone .
When flushing isn ’ t enough , schools may need more extreme procedures .
These include chemically “ shocking ” the plumbing , replacing fixtures or installing building water treatment .
It ’ s important to remember that “ shocking ” is sometimes just a short-term fix , as harmful organisms can return if not eradicated .
A long-term commitment to healthy plumbing is needed .
The pandemic is an opportunity for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so they can protect their students , teachers and staff .
Education and preemptive action can help prevent children from getting sick , at least from the water .
Disclosure Statement : Caitlin R. Proctor receives funding from the US National Science Foundation , US Environmental Protection Agency , and Purdue University .
Andrew J. Whelton receives funding from the US National Science Foundation , Paradise Irrigation District , US Environmental Protection Agency , and Paradise Rotary Foundation .

Bacteria and harmful metals have accumulated in the unused water in building pipes during the pandemic lockdown.
As schools cautiously reopen for the fall semester, several have discovered potentially harmful bacteria in their water systems. Parents are likely concerned about what this means for their children, and other districts may be checking their own water’s safety.
As researchers who investigate water quality in buildings, we warned earlier this year that the pandemic stay-at-home orders could allow bacteria and harmful metals to accumulate in water as it sat unused in buildings’ pipes.
Some building managers looked for those problems as they reopened and found them. More than 10 schools in Ohio and Pennsylvania have reported finding harmful bacteria in their plumbing. Even the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the nation’s health protection agency, discovered Legionella, the bacteria that causes Legionnaires’ disease, in buildings it leases.
This presents potential health risks. For schools, it means the long checklist for maintaining a safe learning environment should include water systems. Luckily, there are simple steps that can minimize the risks.
Schools — It’s Time to Learn About Water Safety
Most schools our team interacts with do not check or flush their water pipes regularly. During school breaks, water often sits in their plumbing for days, weeks or months. This has been even longer during the pandemic.
When water use is low or has stopped, the water stagnates. That can allow organisms like Legionella to grow and harmful metals to leach into the water, potentially making it unsafe to drink or use.
Some school buildings have more than 300 water use locations, such as gym showers, water fountains and sinks in classrooms, kitchens and restrooms. Many locations go unused for long periods of time, even when school is in session. Large buildings can also have underlying problems with water temperature and movement that allow growth even without stagnation.
There are no federal requirements for most schools to test their drinking water. Any testing for Legionella is voluntary, and there are no nationally regarded amounts of Legionella for when to take action, even if schools did test. Testing for other contaminants like metals varies by state and is generally not required, unless the school itself is declared a public water system.
Who Is at Risk?
It’s well-known that harmful organisms can grow in pipes and devices like filters, heaters and cooling towers. Finding Legionella in both cold and hot water systems is not that surprising.
We do not know if Legionella was present before the pandemic. It may have been there last summer. It may be there again next summer, too. Multiple schools have dealt with Legionella in recent years. In Ohio schools, Legionella testing seems to have been influenced by numerous pandemic-related water warnings, as well as a Legionnaires’ disease case and possible link to a janitor’s death at the same school one year earlier.
Most children are not in a high-risk group for Legionnaires’ disease, a pneumonia-like respiratory illness, but faculty, staff and children with weakened immune systems may be. It is also unknown how many children might get a less severe disease from Legionella called Pontiac fever, which has flu-like symptoms.
Infections are often linked to inhalation of aerosols when water splashes, like in showers or hot tubs, but also when flushing toilets or washing hands.
Metals Like Lead and Copper Also Pose Risks
Other health risks may also be building in school pipes. Exposure to lead, which can leach from metal plumbing materials, has been linked to learning disabilities and cardiovascular effects. Copper leaching from metal plumbing materials can cause acute illnesses like nausea and diarrhea.
A new study describes widespread copper contamination in an Indiana school just seven years after it was built. The only reason problems were detected was because the school decided to test — it wasn’t required to do so.
Also problematic are other metals like manganese, nickel and zinc. In schools, we’re finding levels of these metals exceeding acute drinking water exposure limits.
Plumbing isn’t necessarily safe just because it’s built to code.
Keeping Students and Teachers Safe
Schools should assess water safety every summer before students and staff return to the buildings.
All schools should have an active water management program. These programs should address chemical and biological hazards, as well as schools’ dramatic fluctuations in use during the year.
Educating parents, students and staff about the risks is also important. While shutting down water fountains decreases touchpoints where the coronavirus could spread, students and staff should not turn to water outlets that are not approved for drinking. Sports team containers should not be filled at the shower. Hot water systems do not have to undergo rigorous testing that potable cold water systems must pass.
Water management programs can identify regular preemptive actions like flushing water systems before school begins. Flushing can help bring chemical disinfectant residual to every tap to limit growth. Inexpensive hand-held disinfectant meters and thermometers can enable building operators to do their own testing. This testing could be more useful for understanding and managing water system problems than spot-testing for bacteria alone.
When flushing isn’t enough, schools may need more extreme procedures. These include chemically “shocking” the plumbing, replacing fixtures or installing building water treatment. It’s important to remember that “shocking” is sometimes just a short-term fix, as harmful organisms can return if not eradicated. A long-term commitment to healthy plumbing is needed.
The pandemic is an opportunity for schools to better understand their water systems so they can protect their students, teachers and staff. Education and preemptive action can help prevent children from getting sick, at least from the water.
Disclosure Statement: Caitlin R. Proctor receives funding from the US National Science Foundation, US Environmental Protection Agency, and Purdue University. Andrew J. Whelton receives funding from the US National Science Foundation, Paradise Irrigation District, US Environmental Protection Agency, and Paradise Rotary Foundation.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-09-09--The House Is About to Pass Marijuana Decriminalization. What Will the Senate Do?

If President Trump and Senate Republicans were willing to work with Democrats on just one issue , a bill ending federal marijuana prohibition could finally become law .
That ’ s probably not going to happen unless Trump ’ s racist , scorched-earth reelection campaign drastically changes course , but Democratic vice-presidential nominee Kamala Harris can still challenge the president on a long overdue reform that animates voters .
Senator Harris and congressional Democrats are poised to push a historic marijuana decriminalization bill that could begin to address the havoc wreaked on communities of color by the war on drugs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to entrench their positions on cannabis and racialized policing ahead of the election .
Polls show marijuana legalization and decriminalization now enjoy support among a clear and bipartisan majority of voters , but lawmakers have failed to act , until now .
Before the end of the month , House Democrats are expected to pass the Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement ( MORE ) Act , a comprehensive bill that would remove marijuana from the Schedule I list of drugs strictly prohibited under federal law , effectively decriminalizing possession at the federal level @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be left to decide whether to legalize and how to regulate marijuana , as dozens have already done with medical and recreational cannabis .
This approach has sometimes been favored by conservatives and , at times , Trump himself .
The legislation has several “ reparative ” racial justice components aimed at helping communities of color recover from the harms of criminalization and benefit financially from the booming legal cannabis industry .
The bill would also establish a process for scrubbing federal marijuana convictions from criminal records and resentencing people locked away @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Democratic House majority appears firmly behind the bill , activists say , and the majority whip recently announced that the MORE Act would come up for a floor vote later this month , according to an internal email leaked to the press .
If the MORE Act passes , it would mark the first time that a chamber of Congress voted to end federal marijuana prohibition .
Racial justice activists have been pushing for a vote on the bill since last year , and the sense of urgency has only grown as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ killings of George Floyd , Breonna Taylor , Jacob Blake and others spread across the nation .
“ This is a really monumental moment , to be honest , ” said Queen Adesuyi , the national affairs policy manager at the Drug Policy Alliance and co-chair of the Marijuana Justice Coalition , in an interview .
The Marijuana Justice Coalition is an assembly of civil rights and drug reform groups that worked with lawmakers to write and advance the MORE Act in the House .
Harris introduced companion legislation in the Senate , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her party ’ s top ticket to thrust the issue into the presidential race .
For Harris , the MORE Act is an opportunity to atone for her record as a tough-on-crime California prosecutor that angers the left , and to uphold her pledge to stand up for communities of color harmed by mass incarceration and the war on drugs .
Democrats introduced similar marijuana justice legislation last year but failed to take meaningful action until November , when the House Judiciary Committee advanced the MORE Act in an historic vote .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will use her platform on the Democratic ticket , and potentially as our next vice president , to deliver on the promises she made to communities of color and low-income communities around her commitment to end federal criminalization of marijuana and the racist drug war that has ripped apart their communities for decades , ” Adesuyi said .
Black communities are hit particularly hard by the criminalization of drug possession , which police use as an excuse to stop , harass and arrest people .
Earlier this year , an analysis by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people are nearly four times more likely than whites to be arrested for marijuana possession , even though Blacks and whites use marijuana at similar rates .
Police have disproportionately targeted people of color for marijuana arrests since prohibition of the drug began nearly a century ago .
In fact , historians say racism is the reason marijuana became illegal in the first place .
Beginning in the 1930s , prohibitionists used racist depictions of Black people and Mexican immigrants using cannabis to stoke public fears of “ reefer madness ” and pass @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 43 percent of the U.S. ’ s total drug arrests are for marijuana , and 90 percent of those are for simple possession , according to the ACLU analysis .
“ We have been putting pressure on Congress to move on marijuana justice since before the most recent national outcries for racial justice , but between COVID-19 and the continued murders of Black people by the state , we have had to contextualize why a bill like the MORE Act is even more critical in this moment — not less , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continue to funnel people into jails and prisons that have become hotspots for COVID-19 .
Meanwhile , Trump has responded to nationwide demands for racial justice by equating protesters to domestic terrorists , praising far-right agitators stoking violence at protests , defending law enforcement at every turn and comparing police killings of unarmed Black people to a game of golf .
Trump is also activating federal law enforcement to crack down on protests , while exploiting images of isolated street clashes in a thinly veiled attempt to scare rural and suburban white voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the background , a House vote on the MORE Act would put Trump and the GOP in a political pickle , particularly if Harris makes bold moves to advance marijuana and criminal legal reforms in the Senate and on the campaign trail .
If the MORE Act advances to the Senate , the White House will be under pressure to take a position .
Theoretically , Trump could decide to support the legislation and ask the Senate ’ s GOP leadership to take it up .
However , in order to do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ credit with Harris , an opponent the president routinely mocks .
Support for a bill with racial justice provisions would also acknowledge , at least tacitly , that prohibition has contributed to the disparate and harmful policing of Black people .
All of this seems unimaginable at this point .
However , if Trump and Republicans lawmakers oppose the bill or simply ignore it , they will be running afoul of public opinion ahead of the election .
Support for legalizing marijuana for adult recreational use is nearing 70 percent .
Recent polling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ police should stop arresting people for marijuana where it remains illegal — including 58 percent of Republicans .
Fifty-five percent of voters and half of Republicans say police should stop arresting people for sales of small amounts of marijuana as well .
When asked about the MORE Act ’ s specific provisions , which include taxing legal marijuana sales and reinvesting revenues into communities harmed by the drug war , 62 percent of voters and 60 percent of Republicans voiced their support .
To be clear , even if the MORE Act becomes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the main compound in cannabis that causes users to feel high , would still be illegal in the remaining states that criminalize use and possession .
However , lawmakers in these states could no longer point to federal law in defense of prohibition when their constituents demand change , according to Justin Strekal , spokesperson for NORML , a marijuana reform group in the Marijuana Justice Coalition .
If the MORE Act makes headlines when it passes the House — and if Harris is willing to stump for it on the national @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impact on the election .
“ If the House were to hold this vote later this month , it would send a message particularly to younger voters and dissatisfied Americans that the House is willing to hold a vote on something that is tangible to them , ” Strekal said .
“ The House , by having a vote , will tell the American people , are their representatives on the side of freedom , liberty and moving toward racial justice , or are they on the side of oppression , criminalization , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appears to be quite aware that marijuana motivates some voters , and younger voters in particular , who have turned away from him in droves amid his outbursts against Black Lives Matter protests .
At a recent campaign event in Wisconsin , Trump suggested that local marijuana reform ballot initiatives drove Democratic turnout and contributed to former Republican Gov .
Scott Walker ’ s defeat in the 2018 midterms .
“ The next time you run please don ’ t put marijuana on the ballot at the same time you ’ re running @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Walker in the crowd .
“ You brought out like a million people that nobody ever knew were coming out.
” There are currently marijuana reforms on the ballot in five states , including Arizona , which is now considered a toss-up for the presidential race .
But that may be the least of the president ’ s concerns if House Democrats pass the MORE Act and Harris loudly calls out roadblocks in the GOP-controlled Senate .
The Trump administration ’ s record on marijuana would suddenly be in the media spotlight , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump has made empty promises about allowing states to legalize marijuana without federal interference , his administration has moved to do the exact opposite , with statements and policies reflecting decades of dogma rooted in the failed war on drugs .
Senate Republicans may make an attempt at damage control by passing their version of a bill that would allow banks and other financial institutions to do business with cannabis businesses in legalized states without violating federal law , but racial justice activists were outraged when the House passed the same legislation without @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only benefits the weed industry and Wall Street , and with Black Lives Matter protests continuing on a daily basis , passing the “ banking bill ” alone would appear weak and out of touch to an electorate clamoring for change .
The Senate could also pass a watered-down decriminalization bill without racial justice provisions , but it ’ s likely Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will let the MORE Act rot in committee and ignore the issue altogether .
Whether the Democrats will use marijuana justice as a potent election year wedge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the House must pass the MORE Act , and then Harris must take up the torch and dare Trump to push back .

Update: House Democrats postponed a vote on the MORE Act after coming under fire from Republicans during heated negotiations over pandemic relief.
If President Trump and Senate Republicans were willing to work with Democrats on just one issue, a bill ending federal marijuana prohibition could finally become law.
That’s probably not going to happen unless Trump’s racist, scorched-earth reelection campaign drastically changes course, but Democratic vice-presidential nominee Kamala Harris can still challenge the president on a long overdue reform that animates voters.
Senator Harris and congressional Democrats are poised to push a historic marijuana decriminalization bill that could begin to address the havoc wreaked on communities of color by the war on drugs — and force Trump and GOP lawmakers to entrench their positions on cannabis and racialized policing ahead of the election. Polls show marijuana legalization and decriminalization now enjoy support among a clear and bipartisan majority of voters, but lawmakers have failed to act, until now.
Before the end of the month, House Democrats are expected to pass the Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement (MORE) Act, a comprehensive bill that would remove marijuana from the Schedule I list of drugs strictly prohibited under federal law, effectively decriminalizing possession at the federal level. Under the MORE Act, states would be left to decide whether to legalize and how to regulate marijuana, as dozens have already done with medical and recreational cannabis. This approach has sometimes been favored by conservatives and, at times, Trump himself.
The legislation has several “reparative” racial justice components aimed at helping communities of color recover from the harms of criminalization and benefit financially from the booming legal cannabis industry. The bill would also establish a process for scrubbing federal marijuana convictions from criminal records and resentencing people locked away in federal prison for marijuana-related crimes.
The Democratic House majority appears firmly behind the bill, activists say, and the majority whip recently announced that the MORE Act would come up for a floor vote later this month, according to an internal email leaked to the press. If the MORE Act passes, it would mark the first time that a chamber of Congress voted to end federal marijuana prohibition. Racial justice activists have been pushing for a vote on the bill since last year, and the sense of urgency has only grown as protests and uprisings sparked by the police killings of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Jacob Blake and others spread across the nation.
Marijuana legalization and decriminalization now enjoy support among a clear and bipartisan majority of voters.
“This is a really monumental moment, to be honest,” said Queen Adesuyi, the national affairs policy manager at the Drug Policy Alliance and co-chair of the Marijuana Justice Coalition, in an interview.
The Marijuana Justice Coalition is an assembly of civil rights and drug reform groups that worked with lawmakers to write and advance the MORE Act in the House. Harris introduced companion legislation in the Senate, where she could use her position on her party’s top ticket to thrust the issue into the presidential race. For Harris, the MORE Act is an opportunity to atone for her record as a tough-on-crime California prosecutor that angers the left, and to uphold her pledge to stand up for communities of color harmed by mass incarceration and the war on drugs. Democrats introduced similar marijuana justice legislation last year but failed to take meaningful action until November, when the House Judiciary Committee advanced the MORE Act in an historic vote.
“We’re hopeful that Senator Harris will use her platform on the Democratic ticket, and potentially as our next vice president, to deliver on the promises she made to communities of color and low-income communities around her commitment to end federal criminalization of marijuana and the racist drug war that has ripped apart their communities for decades,” Adesuyi said.
Black communities are hit particularly hard by the criminalization of drug possession, which police use as an excuse to stop, harass and arrest people. Earlier this year, an analysis by the American Civil Liberties Union concluded that Black people are nearly four times more likely than whites to be arrested for marijuana possession, even though Blacks and whites use marijuana at similar rates.
Police have disproportionately targeted people of color for marijuana arrests since prohibition of the drug began nearly a century ago. In fact, historians say racism is the reason marijuana became illegal in the first place. Beginning in the 1930s, prohibitionists used racist depictions of Black people and Mexican immigrants using cannabis to stoke public fears of “reefer madness” and pass laws empowering federal law enforcement.
If the MORE Act passes, it would mark the first time that a chamber of Congress voted to end federal marijuana prohibition.
Today, 43 percent of the U.S.’s total drug arrests are for marijuana, and 90 percent of those are for simple possession, according to the ACLU analysis.
“We have been putting pressure on Congress to move on marijuana justice since before the most recent national outcries for racial justice, but between COVID-19 and the continued murders of Black people by the state, we have had to contextualize why a bill like the MORE Act is even more critical in this moment — not less,” Adesuyi said, adding that marijuana arrests continue to funnel people into jails and prisons that have become hotspots for COVID-19.
Meanwhile, Trump has responded to nationwide demands for racial justice by equating protesters to domestic terrorists, praising far-right agitators stoking violence at protests, defending law enforcement at every turn and comparing police killings of unarmed Black people to a game of golf. Trump is also activating federal law enforcement to crack down on protests, while exploiting images of isolated street clashes in a thinly veiled attempt to scare rural and suburban white voters to the polls.
With all this in the background, a House vote on the MORE Act would put Trump and the GOP in a political pickle, particularly if Harris makes bold moves to advance marijuana and criminal legal reforms in the Senate and on the campaign trail.
If the MORE Act advances to the Senate, the White House will be under pressure to take a position. Theoretically, Trump could decide to support the legislation and ask the Senate’s GOP leadership to take it up. However, in order to do that, he would have to share credit with Harris, an opponent the president routinely mocks. Support for a bill with racial justice provisions would also acknowledge, at least tacitly, that prohibition has contributed to the disparate and harmful policing of Black people. All of this seems unimaginable at this point. However, if Trump and Republicans lawmakers oppose the bill or simply ignore it, they will be running afoul of public opinion ahead of the election.
Support for legalizing marijuana for adult recreational use is nearing 70 percent. Recent polling found that 60 percent of voters say police should stop arresting people for marijuana where it remains illegal — including 58 percent of Republicans. Fifty-five percent of voters and half of Republicans say police should stop arresting people for sales of small amounts of marijuana as well. When asked about the MORE Act’s specific provisions, which include taxing legal marijuana sales and reinvesting revenues into communities harmed by the drug war, 62 percent of voters and 60 percent of Republicans voiced their support.
While Trump has made empty promises about allowing states to legalize marijuana without federal interference, his administration has moved to do the exact opposite.
To be clear, even if the MORE Act becomes law, marijuana and products containing THC, the main compound in cannabis that causes users to feel high, would still be illegal in the remaining states that criminalize use and possession. However, lawmakers in these states could no longer point to federal law in defense of prohibition when their constituents demand change, according to Justin Strekal, spokesperson for NORML, a marijuana reform group in the Marijuana Justice Coalition. If the MORE Act makes headlines when it passes the House — and if Harris is willing to stump for it on the national stage — it could have a big impact on the election.
“If the House were to hold this vote later this month, it would send a message particularly to younger voters and dissatisfied Americans that the House is willing to hold a vote on something that is tangible to them,” Strekal said. “The House, by having a vote, will tell the American people, are their representatives on the side of freedom, liberty and moving toward racial justice, or are they on the side of oppression, criminalization, and racially disparate enforcement?”
Trump appears to be quite aware that marijuana motivates some voters, and younger voters in particular, who have turned away from him in droves amid his outbursts against Black Lives Matter protests. At a recent campaign event in Wisconsin, Trump suggested that local marijuana reform ballot initiatives drove Democratic turnout and contributed to former Republican Gov. Scott Walker’s defeat in the 2018 midterms.
“The next time you run please don’t put marijuana on the ballot at the same time you’re running,” Trump reportedly said, with Walker in the crowd. “You brought out like a million people that nobody ever knew were coming out.”
There are currently marijuana reforms on the ballot in five states, including Arizona, which is now considered a toss-up for the presidential race. But that may be the least of the president’s concerns if House Democrats pass the MORE Act and Harris loudly calls out roadblocks in the GOP-controlled Senate. The Trump administration’s record on marijuana would suddenly be in the media spotlight, and it’s dismal. While Trump has made empty promises about allowing states to legalize marijuana without federal interference, his administration has moved to do the exact opposite, with statements and policies reflecting decades of dogma rooted in the failed war on drugs.
Senate Republicans may make an attempt at damage control by passing their version of a bill that would allow banks and other financial institutions to do business with cannabis businesses in legalized states without violating federal law, but racial justice activists were outraged when the House passed the same legislation without broader reforms last year. The legislation only benefits the weed industry and Wall Street, and with Black Lives Matter protests continuing on a daily basis, passing the “banking bill” alone would appear weak and out of touch to an electorate clamoring for change.
The Senate could also pass a watered-down decriminalization bill without racial justice provisions, but it’s likely Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will let the MORE Act rot in committee and ignore the issue altogether.
Whether the Democrats will use marijuana justice as a potent election year wedge issue remains to be seen. First the House must pass the MORE Act, and then Harris must take up the torch and dare Trump to push back.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-09-10--Trump Demands Schools Reopen in Person or Get Defunded

One day after revelations that he had viewed coronavirus as a “ deadly ” disease as early as February , President Trump demanded schools still engaged in virtual learning to return to in-person instruction .
Trump suggested on Thursday morning that the motivation for schools to conduct virtual classes was political , driven primarily by Democratic lawmakers .
He also suggested that schools which didn ’ t return to an in-person format should face financial penalties .
“ Democrats , OPEN THE SCHOOLS ( SAFELY ) , NOW !
” Trump tweeted .
“ When schools are closed , let @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) .
Why should schools be paid when they are closed ?
They shouldn ’ t !
” However , recommendations made earlier this year by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC ) on how to restart in-person instruction ( such as keeping students apart from one another , wearing masks , and other social distancing suggestions ) were previously rejected by the president , deemed by him as being too costly and burdensome .
The tweets from Trump came just one day after a number of interviews between him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ viewed coronavirus as harmful in early February .
In comparing it to the flu , Trump explained to Woodward that the disease was more worrisome .
“ You know , people don ’ t realize , we lose 25,000 , 30,000 people a year here .
Who would ever think that , right ?
” Trump said at the time .
“ This is more deadly ” than the flu , he added .
Weeks later , on March 19 , the president also admitted to Woodward he preferred to minimize the severity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ I wanted to always play it down , ” Trump said .
Trump even conceded to Woodward that the disease could cause harm to young people .
Many school districts across the country are trying to determine whether it is feasible to reopen their doors and offer in-person instruction , or if it ’ s too dangerous to do so within their communities , opting to teach online instead to limit the spread of COVID-19 .
These determinations are especially important to make , particularly in light of research published just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bigger role than originally thought in spreading the disease .
The president has limited control over federal funding for public schools .
An analysis from The New York Times in July found that 90 percent of all budgets nationwide came from local sources .
Still , for schools that depend heavily on federal funding , Trump ’ s threats are not completely empty , and could pressure some districts to make decisions prioritizing economic concerns instead of public health .
Americans are , for the most part , opposed to the kinds of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing virtual learning .
When he made similar threats in July , polling demonstrated that 65 percent of Americans were against reducing federal funding for schools choosing to go online , while only 22 percent said federal funding should be cut .

Polling has shown the vast majority of Americans are against defunding schools that choose to do online learning.
One day after revelations that he had viewed coronavirus as a “deadly” disease as early as February, President Trump demanded schools still engaged in virtual learning to return to in-person instruction.
Trump suggested on Thursday morning that the motivation for schools to conduct virtual classes was political, driven primarily by Democratic lawmakers. He also suggested that schools which didn’t return to an in-person format should face financial penalties.
“Democrats, OPEN THE SCHOOLS (SAFELY), NOW!” Trump tweeted. “When schools are closed, let the money follow the child (FAMILY). Why should schools be paid when they are closed? They shouldn’t!”
However, recommendations made earlier this year by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on how to restart in-person instruction (such as keeping students apart from one another, wearing masks, and other social distancing suggestions) were previously rejected by the president, deemed by him as being too costly and burdensome.
The tweets from Trump came just one day after a number of interviews between him and journalist Bob Woodward revealed he had viewed coronavirus as harmful in early February.
In comparing it to the flu, Trump explained to Woodward that the disease was more worrisome.
“You know, people don’t realize, we lose 25,000, 30,000 people a year here. Who would ever think that, right?” Trump said at the time.
“This is more deadly” than the flu, he added.
Weeks later, on March 19, the president also admitted to Woodward he preferred to minimize the severity of the disease in his public comments.
“I wanted to always play it down,” Trump said.
Trump even conceded to Woodward that the disease could cause harm to young people.
Many school districts across the country are trying to determine whether it is feasible to reopen their doors and offer in-person instruction, or if it’s too dangerous to do so within their communities, opting to teach online instead to limit the spread of COVID-19. These determinations are especially important to make, particularly in light of research published just last month that suggests children played a bigger role than originally thought in spreading the disease.
The president has limited control over federal funding for public schools. An analysis from The New York Times in July found that 90 percent of all budgets nationwide came from local sources.
Still, for schools that depend heavily on federal funding, Trump’s threats are not completely empty, and could pressure some districts to make decisions prioritizing economic concerns instead of public health.
Americans are, for the most part, opposed to the kinds of threats Trump made toward schools that are doing virtual learning. When he made similar threats in July, polling demonstrated that 65 percent of Americans were against reducing federal funding for schools choosing to go online, while only 22 percent said federal funding should be cut.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.