truthout--2020-12-26--Local Candidates Embrace Bolder Climate Policies as Federal Policy Has Faltered

By a mere four votes , Rayonte Bell won his race for Michigan ’ s Berrien County Board of Commissioners this year .
The 22-year-old Democrat made climate change an important part of his platform , calling for deeper investment in solar , water and wind energy .
Bell also acknowledged climate change as the cause of the Michigan shoreline eroding an estimated six inches each year — though not all local officials connect erosion with climate change .
“ There ’ s often a lack of acknowledgment that climate change is a threat to our society .
Without that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of some of our local environmental problems , ” Bell said .
“ These are issues local officials need to step in to address.
” Bell also advocated for replacing local jobs in the fossil fuel industry with those in more environmentally friendly energy sectors — typically a tough sell in Michigan towns .
Backed by passionate climate justice activists throughout the country , more candidates for city , county and state legislative office like Bell are centering climate change and fighting for stronger local climate policy .
A 2019 survey from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent of voters aged 18-29 want local officials to address climate change given regressive federal policies , underscoring the demand for candidates like Bell .
The need for local leadership is clear , as federal leadership on climate change has failed the past four years under the Trump administration .
The U.S. left the Paris climate agreement in 2017 , and President Trump announced that he is reversing dozens of environmental rules during the remainder of his time in office .
President-elect Joe Biden has promised to reenter the Paris climate agreement .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ new administration with some concern , especially since a recent Biden appointment to his cabinet has ties to the fossil fuel industry .
Activists are also pushing the administration to go even further than the Paris climate agreement .
All of this illustrates a growing appetite for bold local leadership on climate justice policy .
There is a broader national strategy led by groups like the Sunrise Movement and Renew New England to support local candidates for public office who champion stronger climate justice policies like the Green New Deal , along with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I am so inspired by the passion of local candidates to fight for climate issues and all social justice issues , ” said Lucas Good , a 17-year-old organizer with the Sunrise Movement ’ s Down Ballot Disruption initiative .
“ It is very tangible to support work at the local level.
” Founded in 2017 , the Sunrise Movement supports candidates who back climate justice initiatives and other progressive policies .
The organization has also conducted larger public demonstrations to call out leaders who vote against bolder climate policies .
Sunrise Movement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ approximately 25 local candidates across 13 states in 2020 , including winners Danielle Friel Otten in Pennsylvania and Todd Lippert in Minnesota .
Friel Otten proposed establishing the Pipeline Early Detection and Warning Board , to help alert residents more quickly of local pipeline hazards .
Lippert has also made climate a key part of his platform , pledging to fight for 100 percent clean energy for Minnesota by 2050 .
The Sunrise Movement also has more than 400 local volunteer chapters , or hubs , that help engage in outreach to voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Los Angeles , Democrat Nithya Raman , 39 , received support from local Sunrise Movement hub activists , and she won her 2020 race for Los Angeles City Council against incumbent Democrat David Ryu .
Raman ran as a champion of the Green New Deal and was viewed as stronger on climate policy than the incumbent .
Unlike much of the rest of the City Council , Raman supported Los Angeles ’ s 2015 mobility plan , which pushes for an incremental shift away from driving cars and in favor of bicycles and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Raman is already seeing pressure from local activists to go even further than the 2015 mobility plan , demonstrating how climate activists push local policymakers to be bolder on climate issues .
“ What we saw over the last four years was a federal government that was disinterested in responding to the climate crisis with any sort of urgency , a government that engaged in taking apart our policies around environmental protection , ” Raman told Truthout .
“ But in our local jurisdiction , we have numerous tools that can support climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ local goals.
” Like Bell , Raman sees how climate change disproportionately affects poorer communities .
As a career advocate for homeless people , Raman is concerned about the impact of climate change on the unhoused population .
During the September 2020 heat wave in Los Angeles , at least three homeless individuals died due to heat exposure .
“ The number of deaths among the homeless population as a result of heat exposure is grim , ” Raman said .
“ In Los Angeles , we have seen more deaths from exposure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cora Went , 28 , is a volunteer with Sunrise Movement ’ s Los Angeles hub and a graduate student focusing on solar energy at the California Institute of Technology .
She spent months volunteering for several local candidates , including Raman .
“ Los Angeles is a major urban oil field , and there are oil refineries right near people ’ s homes .
It is horrific to see asthma rates and cancer rates in some of those neighborhoods , ” Went told Truthout .
“ Nithya Raman is one of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ council … who understands the urgency of that.
” A committee of the Los Angeles City Council voted on December 1 to phase out neighborhood oil drilling .
This issue will now come to the full city council for a vote .
Raman plans to support the committee ’ s recommendation , demonstrating an immediate intervention she can make on local climate policy .
Like the Sunrise Movement , Renew New England supports local legislative candidates in Connecticut , Maine , Rhode Island , and other New England states who commit to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fighting climate change .
The group currently lists more than 100 candidates on its website who have committed to stronger climate policy , all of whom are candidates for local house or assembly races .
Approximately 64 percent of Renew New England ’ s endorsed candidates won their races in 2020 , including Brianna Henries of Rhode Island ’ s 64th house district .
Henries is a 29-year-old woman of color raised by a single mother .
At one point during her childhood , Henries was homeless .
“ True equity will only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we face — economic , racial and environmental injustice — are systemic and interconnected , and the way we approach them reflects that , ” Henries told Truthout .
Henries unseated incumbent Democrat Jose Serodio .
According to a campaign mailer Renew New England shared with Truthout , Serodio criticized Henries for supporting the Green New Deal .
Serodio was also a reliable supporter of Rhode Island House Speaker Nicholas Mattielo ; Mattiello has stated that Rhode Island can not do anything about climate change .
Critically , the Sunrise Movement and Renew @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a silo , but rather intentionally prioritize a broad range of social justice issues .
Renew New England ’ s platform is centered on its Jobs Guarantee program , which among many goals , seeks climate-resilient affordable housing and food , and health care for all .
“ All of the local candidates we support committed to an ambitious platform to address interlocking crises of racial injustice , climate crisis and unemployment , ” said A.J .
Braverman , a 21-year-old organizer with Renew New England .
“ We have to prioritize @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If we don ’ t , we leave communities vulnerable and excluded , and that hurts all of us.
” As Henries told Truthout , “ I support Renew ’ s platform because it ’ s by far the most equitable , ambitious and comprehensive plan on the table to address the collective crises my state is facing.
” Both Nithya Raman and Rayonte Bell are also people of color who , as local officeholders , can now seek to implement policies that address climate change and support low-income communities of color @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , is aware of the historic nature of her victory , having been on the same ballot as Vice President-elect Kamala Harris .
“ It is so moving that my daughter is growing up in such a time to see women of color in leadership at all levels , and for her that will be totally normal , ” Raman said .
Because of the potential impact that Bell , Raman and Henries are poised to make , hyperlocal activism is becoming a preeminent strategy to address climate change .
A recent United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent of the world ’ s energy and produce more than 60 percent of greenhouse gas emissions .
A 2018 study cited by Scientific American magazine noted that residents of just 100 cities account for 20 percent of the overall carbon footprint .
And cities seem to be taking notice of these trends ; as of December 4 , 2020 , more than 1,800 localities throughout the world have declared a climate emergency .
“ Fortunately , some states and cities were indeed working productively during the dark ages of the Trump climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ loudly enough , ” Daniel Moran , of the Norwegian University of Science and Technology who led the 2018 study , told Truthout .
“ The federal government is a player , and a powerful one , but regardless of what it does or doesn ’ t do , there is an enormous opportunity to make big , effective changes in the town where you live right now , the county it is part of , and the state you vote in.
” Still , even the strongest local policies can not match @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the federal level , which has implications across the United States and globally .
“ The biggest limitation of local strategy is capacity , ” Lucas Good of Sunrise Movement told Truthout .
“ Smaller communities take more effort to work in because there is less structure and fewer people to work with .
Congress and the administration need to help set the trend for the entire country.
” Yet local policymakers are carving out important opportunities on policy , and their proximity to their communities builds potential to shift voters ’ thinking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ win means his messages are resonating in a county that at times leans conservative .
President Trump won Berrien County in 2016 , though President-elect Biden won this year .
“ If you run on ideas that center on climate change , you can persuade people locally , ” he said , “ It changes dialogue , to the point where presidential candidates won ’ t win a certain district without acknowledging that climate change is real .
”

Given federal failure on climate change policy, voters are turning to local officials to respond to the climate crisis.
By a mere four votes, Rayonte Bell won his race for Michigan’s Berrien County Board of Commissioners this year. The 22-year-old Democrat made climate change an important part of his platform, calling for deeper investment in solar, water and wind energy. Bell also acknowledged climate change as the cause of the Michigan shoreline eroding an estimated six inches each year — though not all local officials connect erosion with climate change.
“There’s often a lack of acknowledgment that climate change is a threat to our society. Without that acknowledgment, you find an incomplete understanding of some of our local environmental problems,” Bell said. “These are issues local officials need to step in to address.”
Bell also advocated for replacing local jobs in the fossil fuel industry with those in more environmentally friendly energy sectors — typically a tough sell in Michigan towns.
Backed by passionate climate justice activists throughout the country, more candidates for city, county and state legislative office like Bell are centering climate change and fighting for stronger local climate policy. A 2019 survey from the U.S. Conference of Mayors showed that 74 percent of voters aged 18-29 want local officials to address climate change given regressive federal policies, underscoring the demand for candidates like Bell.
The need for local leadership is clear, as federal leadership on climate change has failed the past four years under the Trump administration. The U.S. left the Paris climate agreement in 2017, and President Trump announced that he is reversing dozens of environmental rules during the remainder of his time in office. President-elect Joe Biden has promised to reenter the Paris climate agreement.
Yet climate justice activists look to the new administration with some concern, especially since a recent Biden appointment to his cabinet has ties to the fossil fuel industry. Activists are also pushing the administration to go even further than the Paris climate agreement.
All of this illustrates a growing appetite for bold local leadership on climate justice policy. There is a broader national strategy led by groups like the Sunrise Movement and Renew New England to support local candidates for public office who champion stronger climate justice policies like the Green New Deal, along with a range of progressive policies.
A 2019 survey from the U.S. Conference of Mayors showed that 74 percent of voters aged 18-29 want local officials to address climate change given regressive federal policies.
“I am so inspired by the passion of local candidates to fight for climate issues and all social justice issues,” said Lucas Good, a 17-year-old organizer with the Sunrise Movement’s Down Ballot Disruption initiative. “It is very tangible to support work at the local level.”
Founded in 2017, the Sunrise Movement supports candidates who back climate justice initiatives and other progressive policies. The organization has also conducted larger public demonstrations to call out leaders who vote against bolder climate policies.
Sunrise Movement’s Down Ballot Disruption program supported approximately 25 local candidates across 13 states in 2020, including winners Danielle Friel Otten in Pennsylvania and Todd Lippert in Minnesota. Friel Otten proposed establishing the Pipeline Early Detection and Warning Board, to help alert residents more quickly of local pipeline hazards. Lippert has also made climate a key part of his platform, pledging to fight for 100 percent clean energy for Minnesota by 2050.
The Sunrise Movement also has more than 400 local volunteer chapters, or hubs, that help engage in outreach to voters in support of local candidates.
In Los Angeles, Democrat Nithya Raman, 39, received support from local Sunrise Movement hub activists, and she won her 2020 race for Los Angeles City Council against incumbent Democrat David Ryu. Raman ran as a champion of the Green New Deal and was viewed as stronger on climate policy than the incumbent.
Unlike much of the rest of the City Council, Raman supported Los Angeles’s 2015 mobility plan, which pushes for an incremental shift away from driving cars and in favor of bicycles and other environmentally friendly modes of transportation.
Raman is already seeing pressure from local activists to go even further than the 2015 mobility plan, demonstrating how climate activists push local policymakers to be bolder on climate issues.
Hyperlocal activism is becoming a preeminent strategy to address climate change.
“What we saw over the last four years was a federal government that was disinterested in responding to the climate crisis with any sort of urgency, a government that engaged in taking apart our policies around environmental protection,” Raman told Truthout. “But in our local jurisdiction, we have numerous tools that can support climate justice. We can push for ambitious local goals.”
Like Bell, Raman sees how climate change disproportionately affects poorer communities. As a career advocate for homeless people, Raman is concerned about the impact of climate change on the unhoused population. During the September 2020 heat wave in Los Angeles, at least three homeless individuals died due to heat exposure.
“The number of deaths among the homeless population as a result of heat exposure is grim,” Raman said. “In Los Angeles, we have seen more deaths from exposure to extreme weather than New York.”
Cora Went, 28, is a volunteer with Sunrise Movement’s Los Angeles hub and a graduate student focusing on solar energy at the California Institute of Technology. She spent months volunteering for several local candidates, including Raman.
“Los Angeles is a major urban oil field, and there are oil refineries right near people’s homes. It is horrific to see asthma rates and cancer rates in some of those neighborhoods,” Went told Truthout. “Nithya Raman is one of the few members of the Los Angeles city council … who understands the urgency of that.”
A committee of the Los Angeles City Council voted on December 1 to phase out neighborhood oil drilling. This issue will now come to the full city council for a vote. Raman plans to support the committee’s recommendation, demonstrating an immediate intervention she can make on local climate policy.
Like the Sunrise Movement, Renew New England supports local legislative candidates in Connecticut, Maine, Rhode Island, and other New England states who commit to a broad range of progressive objectives, including fighting climate change. The group currently lists more than 100 candidates on its website who have committed to stronger climate policy, all of whom are candidates for local house or assembly races.
Approximately 64 percent of Renew New England’s endorsed candidates won their races in 2020, including Brianna Henries of Rhode Island’s 64th house district.
Henries is a 29-year-old woman of color raised by a single mother. At one point during her childhood, Henries was homeless. “True equity will only come when we recognize that the issues we face — economic, racial and environmental injustice — are systemic and interconnected, and the way we approach them reflects that,” Henries told Truthout.
A 2018 study cited by Scientific American magazine noted that residents of just 100 cities account for 20 percent of the overall carbon footprint.
Henries unseated incumbent Democrat Jose Serodio. According to a campaign mailer Renew New England shared with Truthout, Serodio criticized Henries for supporting the Green New Deal. Serodio was also a reliable supporter of Rhode Island House Speaker Nicholas Mattielo; Mattiello has stated that Rhode Island cannot do anything about climate change.
Critically, the Sunrise Movement and Renew New England do not place environmental issues in a silo, but rather intentionally prioritize a broad range of social justice issues. Renew New England’s platform is centered on its Jobs Guarantee program, which among many goals, seeks climate-resilient affordable housing and food, and health care for all.
“All of the local candidates we support committed to an ambitious platform to address interlocking crises of racial injustice, climate crisis and unemployment,” said A.J. Braverman, a 21-year-old organizer with Renew New England. “We have to prioritize racial justice every step of the way. If we don’t, we leave communities vulnerable and excluded, and that hurts all of us.”
As Henries told Truthout, “I support Renew’s platform because it’s by far the most equitable, ambitious and comprehensive plan on the table to address the collective crises my state is facing.”
Both Nithya Raman and Rayonte Bell are also people of color who, as local officeholders, can now seek to implement policies that address climate change and support low-income communities of color. Raman, who is South Asian, is aware of the historic nature of her victory, having been on the same ballot as Vice President-elect Kamala Harris.
“It is so moving that my daughter is growing up in such a time to see women of color in leadership at all levels, and for her that will be totally normal,” Raman said.
Because of the potential impact that Bell, Raman and Henries are poised to make, hyperlocal activism is becoming a preeminent strategy to address climate change. A recent United Nations study found that cities consume 78 percent of the world’s energy and produce more than 60 percent of greenhouse gas emissions. A 2018 study cited by Scientific American magazine noted that residents of just 100 cities account for 20 percent of the overall carbon footprint.
And cities seem to be taking notice of these trends; as of December 4, 2020, more than 1,800 localities throughout the world have declared a climate emergency.
“Fortunately, some states and cities were indeed working productively during the dark ages of the Trump climate policy. That story is not told loudly enough,” Daniel Moran, of the Norwegian University of Science and Technology who led the 2018 study, told Truthout. “The federal government is a player, and a powerful one, but regardless of what it does or doesn’t do, there is an enormous opportunity to make big, effective changes in the town where you live right now, the county it is part of, and the state you vote in.”
Still, even the strongest local policies cannot match the sheer weight of bold action at the federal level, which has implications across the United States and globally.
“The biggest limitation of local strategy is capacity,” Lucas Good of Sunrise Movement told Truthout. “Smaller communities take more effort to work in because there is less structure and fewer people to work with. Congress and the administration need to help set the trend for the entire country.”
Yet local policymakers are carving out important opportunities on policy, and their proximity to their communities builds potential to shift voters’ thinking. For Bell, eking out a win means his messages are resonating in a county that at times leans conservative. President Trump won Berrien County in 2016, though President-elect Biden won this year.
“If you run on ideas that center on climate change, you can persuade people locally,” he said, “It changes dialogue, to the point where presidential candidates won’t win a certain district without acknowledging that climate change is real.”
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--2020-12-27--Sanders Condemns Trump for Allowing Millions to Lose Unemployment Benefits

Sen. Bernie Sanders on Sunday led progressive lawmakers in condemning President Donald Trump ’ s refusal to approve a $ 900 billion Covid-19 relief and spending bill as unemployment coverage expired for millions of Americans on Saturday night as a result of his intransigence .
“ What the president is doing right now is unbelievably cruel , ” Sanders ( I-Vt. ) said during an appearance on ABC ’ s “ This Week ” Sunday morning .
“ Many millions of people are losing their extended unemployment benefits .
They ’ re going to be evicted from their apartments because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Congress on Monday approved a compromise relief bill that would have temporarily averted catastrophic expiration of critical unemployment and other benefits — including an extension of the federal eviction moratorium — during the deadliest period of the pandemic , Trump declined to sign the measure into law , blasting its $ 600 direct payments to Americans as “ a disgrace ” and calling for $ 2,000 stimulus checks instead .
Rep. Rashida Tlaib ( D-Mich. ) — one of only two House Democrats to vote against the bill — also called its $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I have watched as many of my colleagues rush to provide billions to corporations and wealthy individuals , while admonishing the needs of the majority of families , ” Tlaib explained on Monday .
“ Republicans continue to do all they can do to poison our society further with corporate greed , while abandoning the very people they are supposed to be working for.
” “ This is evident by the inclusion of the ‘ three martini lunch ’ tax giveaway , ” she added , referring to a tax deduction for business @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Sanders on Sunday argued that the “ terrible economic crisis facing this country ” makes action imperative .
“ We are looking at a way to get the vaccine distributed to tens of millions of people , ” Sanders said , referring to the massive nationwide effort to distribute Covid-19 vaccines .
“ There ’ s money in that bill.
” Progressive lawmakers from across the country joined Sanders in urging the relief bill ’ s passage .
“ Here we are with people living on the edge as a result of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is playing with their lives and their livelihoods , ” said Rep. Barbara Lee ( D-Calif. ) during a Saturday interview on MSNBC .
“ People can ’ t afford to live life on the edge… Eight million more people have fallen below the poverty line.
” President-elect Joe Biden joined the chorus of bipartisan voices calling on Trump to sign the bill .
“ It is the day after Christmas , and millions of families don ’ t know if they ’ ll be able to make ends meet because of President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an economic relief bill approved by Congress with an overwhelming and bipartisan majority , ” Biden said in a statement on Saturday .
Trump remained defiant following the expiration of jobless benefits .
“ I simply want to get our great people $ 2,000 , rather than the measly $ 600 that is now in the bill , ” he tweeted .
“ Also , stop the billions of dollars in ‘ pork . '
” While the president golfed , Americans suffered .
Lanetris Haines , a self-employed single mother of three @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the loss of her $ 129 weekly lifeline .
“ It ’ s a chess game , and we ’ re all pawns , ” Haines told the Associated Press .

Sen. Bernie Sanders on Sunday led progressive lawmakers in condemning President Donald Trump’s refusal to approve a $900 billion Covid-19 relief and spending bill as unemployment coverage expired for millions of Americans on Saturday night as a result of his intransigence.
“What the president is doing right now is unbelievably cruel,” Sanders (I-Vt.) said during an appearance on ABC’s “This Week” Sunday morning. “Many millions of people are losing their extended unemployment benefits. They’re going to be evicted from their apartments because the eviction moratorium is ending.”
Although Congress on Monday approved a compromise relief bill that would have temporarily averted catastrophic expiration of critical unemployment and other benefits — including an extension of the federal eviction moratorium — during the deadliest period of the pandemic, Trump declined to sign the measure into law, blasting its $600 direct payments to Americans as “a disgrace” and calling for $2,000 stimulus checks instead.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) — one of only two House Democrats to vote against the bill — also called its $600 payment “woefully inadequate.”
“I have watched as many of my colleagues rush to provide billions to corporations and wealthy individuals, while admonishing the needs of the majority of families,” Tlaib explained on Monday. “Republicans continue to do all they can do to poison our society further with corporate greed, while abandoning the very people they are supposed to be working for.”
“This is evident by the inclusion of the ‘three martini lunch’ tax giveaway,” she added, referring to a tax deduction for business meals included in the bill.
However, Sanders on Sunday argued that the “terrible economic crisis facing this country” makes action imperative.
“We are looking at a way to get the vaccine distributed to tens of millions of people,” Sanders said, referring to the massive nationwide effort to distribute Covid-19 vaccines. “There’s money in that bill.”
Progressive lawmakers from across the country joined Sanders in urging the relief bill’s passage.
“Here we are with people living on the edge as a result of this pandemic, and [Trump] is playing with their lives and their livelihoods,” said Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) during a Saturday interview on MSNBC. “People can’t afford to live life on the edge… Eight million more people have fallen below the poverty line.”
Since the start, House Democrats have been trying to deliver critical relief to help people survive this pandemic. It’s time for Republicans to do the right thing and pass $2,000 survival payments. pic.twitter.com/1veizSKw5t — Rep. Barbara Lee (@RepBarbaraLee) December 27, 2020
Millions lost unemployment benefits today, millions more fear losing their homes b/c they can't pay rent, Food lines are growing longer. Trump is in luxury resort, perfecting art of cruelty & chaos. We proposed $2k checks months ago. Pass it, GOP. https://t.co/Nc0Xwpdu7A — Rep. Pramila Jayapal (@RepJayapal) December 27, 2020
Mitch McConnell and the @SenateGOP waited months to pass a shamefully insufficient relief bill. Now Trump is abandoning families who desperately need unemployment checks for food and rent. The Republicans need to stop playing games while Americans starve. https://t.co/h6ETNGFMYY — Elizabeth Warren (@SenWarren) December 26, 2020
President-elect Joe Biden joined the chorus of bipartisan voices calling on Trump to sign the bill.
“It is the day after Christmas, and millions of families don’t know if they’ll be able to make ends meet because of President Donald Trump’s refusal to sign an economic relief bill approved by Congress with an overwhelming and bipartisan majority,” Biden said in a statement on Saturday.
Trump remained defiant following the expiration of jobless benefits.
“I simply want to get our great people $2,000, rather than the measly $600 that is now in the bill,” he tweeted. “Also, stop the billions of dollars in ‘pork.'”
While the president golfed, Americans suffered. Lanetris Haines, a self-employed single mother of three in South Bend, Indiana, braced for the loss of her $129 weekly lifeline.
“It’s a chess game, and we’re all pawns,” Haines told the Associated Press.
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--2020-12-27--DOJ Charges Walmart With Illegally Dispensing and Distributing Opioids

More than two years after the federal government was preparing to indict Walmart on charges of illegally dispensing opioids , the U.S. Department of Justice is finally taking action .
But it ’ s seeking a financial penalty , not the criminal sanction prosecutors had pushed for .
On Tuesday , the Department of Justice brought a civil suit against Walmart in U.S. District Court in Delaware , accusing the retailing behemoth of illegally dispensing and distributing opioids , helping to fuel a health crisis that has led to the deaths of around half a million Americans since 1999 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ operates one of the biggest pharmacy chains in the country , of knowingly filling thousands of invalid opioid prescriptions , failing to alert the government to dangerous or excessive prescriptions , and pushing pharmacists to work faster and look the other way in order to boost corporate profits .
By law , pharmacists are prohibited from filling prescriptions they know are not for legitimate medical needs .
“ Walmart was well aware of these rules , but made little effort to ensure that it complied with them , ” the government said in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pressure ” on pharmacists to fill prescriptions as fast as they could , while preventing them from halting prescriptions they knew came from bad doctors , the government said .
When Walmart pharmacists warned headquarters in Bentonville , Arkansas , about doctors who operated “ known pill mills , ” did “ not practice real medicine ” and had “ horrendous prescribing practices , ” headquarters ignored their pleas , the lawsuit asserts .
Walmart denounced the suit .
“ The Justice Department ’ s investigation is tainted by historical ethics violations , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that unlawfully forces pharmacists to come between patients and their doctors , and is riddled with factual inaccuracies and cherry-picked documents taken out of context , ” the company said in a statement .
In October , aware that a government suit was likely , Walmart took the highly unusual step of preemptively suing the Justice Department .
The company argued that it did nothing wrong and , there , too , accused the government of acting unethically .
According to Walmart , the federal prosecutors used the threat of a criminal case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
( Prosecutors deny that claim . )
The case against Walmart originated in the summer of 2016 , with an investigation of two Texas doctors , Howard Diamond and Randall Wade , who were prescribing opioids on a vast scale .
Federal prosecutors in the Eastern District of Texas eventually brought cases against the pair , accusing them of contributing to multiple deaths .
The doctors were subsequently convicted of illegal distribution of opioids , with Wade sentenced to 10 years in prison and Diamond to 20 years .
That case uncovered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ itself .
In 2018 , Joe Brown , the Trump-appointed U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Texas , sought to criminally indict the company over its opioid practices , as detailed in a ProPublica story in March .
During this period , as Walmart tried to fend off a criminal case , its lawyers expressed willingness to discuss a civil settlement .
The company “ stands ready to engage in a principled and reasoned dialogue concerning any potential conduct of its employees that merits a civil penalty , ” Jones Day partner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the head of the criminal division of the Justice Department .
The Texas prosecutors were unswayed by Walmart ’ s arguments .
Joined by the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration , Brown ’ s team traveled to Justice Department headquarters in Washington to make an impassioned plea to bring the criminal case .
But Trump appointees at the highest levels of the department — including the deputy attorneys general at different times , Rod Rosenstein and Jeffrey Rosen — stymied the attempt , dictating that Walmart could not be indicted .
( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . )
When prosecutors sought to criminally prosecute a Walmart manager , top officials in the Trump Justice Department prevented that , too .
The Justice Department then dragged out civil settlement negotiations .
The delays prompted Josh Russ , the head of the civil division in the Eastern District of Texas who had urged bringing a civil suit years ago , to resign in protest .
“ Corporations can not poison Americans with impunity .
Good sense dictates stern and swift action when Americans die , ” Russ wrote in his resignation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s suit largely echoes the allegations that the Eastern District of Texas had made in seeking a criminal case .
Legal officials can in some circumstances pursue the same allegations either criminally or civilly , with a higher burden of proof for prosecutors and stiffer potential penalties for defendants when it comes to criminal cases .
In the new suit , prosecutors said Walmart pharmacists routinely filled prescriptions from known “ pill mill ” doctors .
Sometimes those doctors explicitly told their patients to go to Walmart pharmacies , the complaint alleges @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when its pharmacists knew that other pharmacies had stopped filling prescriptions from those doctors .
The suit also details that Walmart ’ s compliance unit based out of its headquarters collected “ voluminous ” information that its pharmacists were regularly being served invalid prescriptions , but “ for years withheld that information ” from its pharmacists .
In fact , the compliance department often sent the opposite message .
When a regional manager received a list of troubling prescriptions from headquarters , he asked , “ Does your team pull out any insights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” In an email cited in the suit , which was first reported by ProPublica , a director of Health and Wellness Practice Compliance at Walmart , responded , “ Driving sales and patient awareness is a far better use of our Market Directors and Market manager ’ s time.
” Walmart headquarters regularly put pressure on pharmacists to work faster .
Managers pushed pharmacists because “ shorter wait times keep patients in store , ” that this was a “ battle of seconds ” and that “ wait times are our Achilles @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Pharmacists said the pressure and Walmart ’ s thin staffing “ doesn ’ t allow time for individual evaluation of prescriptions , ” the suit says .
In May , two months after ProPublica published its story , Brown , the U.S. attorney who had pushed for criminal prosecution of Walmart , left his job abruptly .
His resignation letter cited the need to “ win the fight against opioid abuse in order to save our country ” and added that “ players both big and small must meet equal justice under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a call seeking comment .

More than two years after the federal government was preparing to indict Walmart on charges of illegally dispensing opioids, the U.S. Department of Justice is finally taking action. But it’s seeking a financial penalty, not the criminal sanction prosecutors had pushed for.
On Tuesday, the Department of Justice brought a civil suit against Walmart in U.S. District Court in Delaware, accusing the retailing behemoth of illegally dispensing and distributing opioids, helping to fuel a health crisis that has led to the deaths of around half a million Americans since 1999.
The government accuses the company, which operates one of the biggest pharmacy chains in the country, of knowingly filling thousands of invalid opioid prescriptions, failing to alert the government to dangerous or excessive prescriptions, and pushing pharmacists to work faster and look the other way in order to boost corporate profits.
By law, pharmacists are prohibited from filling prescriptions they know are not for legitimate medical needs. “Walmart was well aware of these rules, but made little effort to ensure that it complied with them,” the government said in its suit.
Walmart applied “enormous pressure” on pharmacists to fill prescriptions as fast as they could, while preventing them from halting prescriptions they knew came from bad doctors, the government said. When Walmart pharmacists warned headquarters in Bentonville, Arkansas, about doctors who operated “known pill mills,” did “not practice real medicine” and had “horrendous prescribing practices,” headquarters ignored their pleas, the lawsuit asserts.
Walmart denounced the suit. “The Justice Department’s investigation is tainted by historical ethics violations, and this lawsuit invents a legal theory that unlawfully forces pharmacists to come between patients and their doctors, and is riddled with factual inaccuracies and cherry-picked documents taken out of context,” the company said in a statement. In October, aware that a government suit was likely, Walmart took the highly unusual step of preemptively suing the Justice Department. The company argued that it did nothing wrong and, there, too, accused the government of acting unethically. According to Walmart, the federal prosecutors used the threat of a criminal case to try to negotiate higher civil penalties. (Prosecutors deny that claim.)
The case against Walmart originated in the summer of 2016, with an investigation of two Texas doctors, Howard Diamond and Randall Wade, who were prescribing opioids on a vast scale. Federal prosecutors in the Eastern District of Texas eventually brought cases against the pair, accusing them of contributing to multiple deaths. The doctors were subsequently convicted of illegal distribution of opioids, with Wade sentenced to 10 years in prison and Diamond to 20 years. That case uncovered evidence that led prosecutors to investigate Walmart itself.
In 2018, Joe Brown, the Trump-appointed U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Texas, sought to criminally indict the company over its opioid practices, as detailed in a ProPublica story in March. During this period, as Walmart tried to fend off a criminal case, its lawyers expressed willingness to discuss a civil settlement. The company “stands ready to engage in a principled and reasoned dialogue concerning any potential conduct of its employees that merits a civil penalty,” Jones Day partner Karen Hewitt wrote in August 2018 to the head of the criminal division of the Justice Department.
The Texas prosecutors were unswayed by Walmart’s arguments. Joined by the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration, Brown’s team traveled to Justice Department headquarters in Washington to make an impassioned plea to bring the criminal case.
But Trump appointees at the highest levels of the department — including the deputy attorneys general at different times, Rod Rosenstein and Jeffrey Rosen — stymied the attempt, dictating that Walmart could not be indicted. (Rosen recently was named acting attorney general.) When prosecutors sought to criminally prosecute a Walmart manager, top officials in the Trump Justice Department prevented that, too.
The Justice Department then dragged out civil settlement negotiations. The delays prompted Josh Russ, the head of the civil division in the Eastern District of Texas who had urged bringing a civil suit years ago, to resign in protest. “Corporations cannot poison Americans with impunity. Good sense dictates stern and swift action when Americans die,” Russ wrote in his resignation letter in October 2019.
Last week’s suit largely echoes the allegations that the Eastern District of Texas had made in seeking a criminal case. Legal officials can in some circumstances pursue the same allegations either criminally or civilly, with a higher burden of proof for prosecutors and stiffer potential penalties for defendants when it comes to criminal cases.
In the new suit, prosecutors said Walmart pharmacists routinely filled prescriptions from known “pill mill” doctors. Sometimes those doctors explicitly told their patients to go to Walmart pharmacies, the complaint alleges. Walmart filled prescriptions from doctors even when its pharmacists knew that other pharmacies had stopped filling prescriptions from those doctors.
The suit also details that Walmart’s compliance unit based out of its headquarters collected “voluminous” information that its pharmacists were regularly being served invalid prescriptions, but “for years withheld that information” from its pharmacists.
In fact, the compliance department often sent the opposite message. When a regional manager received a list of troubling prescriptions from headquarters, he asked, “Does your team pull out any insights from these we need to highlight?”
In an email cited in the suit, which was first reported by ProPublica, a director of Health and Wellness Practice Compliance at Walmart, responded, “Driving sales and patient awareness is a far better use of our Market Directors and Market manager’s time.”
Walmart headquarters regularly put pressure on pharmacists to work faster. Managers pushed pharmacists because “shorter wait times keep patients in store,” that this was a “battle of seconds” and that “wait times are our Achilles heel!” according to the suit. Pharmacists said the pressure and Walmart’s thin staffing “doesn’t allow time for individual evaluation of prescriptions,” the suit says.
In May, two months after ProPublica published its story, Brown, the U.S. attorney who had pushed for criminal prosecution of Walmart, left his job abruptly. His resignation letter cited the need to “win the fight against opioid abuse in order to save our country” and added that “players both big and small must meet equal justice under the law.” Brown did not return a call seeking comment.
Doris Burke contributed reporting.
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--2020-12-27--Amazon Has Allowed Anti-LGBT Groups to Raise Money on Its Donations Platform

Dozens of US-based anti-LGBT groups are fundraising on Amazon ’ s online donations platform — despite the company ’ s policies against discrimination based on sexual orientation — a new investigation from openDemocracy reveals .
Amazon has emerged as one of the few winners during the coronavirus pandemic because lockdown , infection fears and the closure of physical shops have encouraged online shopping .
The company has seen profits rise almost 50 % , compared to last year .
“ Experience feel-good shopping ” is the slogan of the AmazonSmile programme , which enables customers to donate to charities as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ programme has facilitated $ 215 million in such donations since its launch in 2013 .
AmazonSmile ’ s Participation Agreement clearly states that eligible charities can not “ engage in , support , encourage , or promote : intolerance , discrimination or discriminatory practices based on race , sex , religion , nationality , disability , sexual orientation , or age ” .
However , openDemocracy research has discovered that more than 40 organisations listed on the US AmazonSmile platform publicly oppose LGBT rights and equality .
Among them are groups that have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the US and internationally opposing same-sex marriage , adoption and anti-discrimination laws • claimed homosexuality “ opens the door to the demonic realm ” and legalising same-sex marriage “ enforces ” a “ demonically driven , immoral agenda ” • described COVID-19 as “ the consequential wrath of God ” and punishment for sins including society ’ s “ proclivity toward lesbianism and homosexuality ” • attacked TV shows ( including American Idol ) for increasing “ social acceptance of homosexuality ” by presenting LGBT people to viewers “ as ordinary folks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ involuntary termination ” if they are found to personally express support for same-sex marriage equality .
In response to openDemocracy ’ s findings , human rights activists said Amazon should remove these groups from its platform immediately .
“ Companies , if they really walk the talk , shouldn ’ t be giving their platform to organisations that are working to limit the rights of other people , ” said Evelyne Paradis , executive director of the LGBT advocacy group ILGA-Europe .
It ’ s good that Amazon has a diversity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , but “ they shouldn ’ t be giving space to any organisation [ … ] that is actively fuelling hatred and/or working against the rights of other people.
” Amazon has made numerous public pledges to non-discrimination and inclusion of LGBT people .
For example , as an employer , it has , for several years , offered benefits to same-sex partners of its employees and covered transgender surgical procedures .
Amazon founder and CEO Jeff Bezos accepted the 2017 National Equality Award from the US LGBT rights advocacy group Human @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and his then wife publicly pledged $ 2.5m to the fight for same-sex marriage in Washington state .
The company ’ s UK website advertises partnerships with LGBT rights charities , including Stonewall ’ s Diversity Champions programme for inclusive workplace environments .
Two major US Christian right organisations — Alliance Defending Freedom ( ADF ) and the Family Research Council ( FRC ) — were previously removed from the AmazonSmile programme amid controversy over their advocacy against equality for LGBT people .
But openDemocracy ’ s research reveals that these are only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more organisations with similar anti-LGBT track records remain on AmazonSmile .
A director of one such outfit , Human Life International ( HLI ) , has called on people to “ oppose the LGBT movement ” and claimed that homosexuality is linked to paedophilia .
Earlier this year , openDemocracy revealed how this group has also supported anti-abortion projects in Latin America that have been accused of spreading misinformation and manipulating vulnerable women about their health and rights .
The American Center for Law and Justice ( ACLJ ) , led by Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is also listed on the AmazonSmile platform .
It has intervened in numerous US court cases opposing LGBT marriage equality .
Its European office also provided legal arguments for banning abortions for Polish women in cases of fatal foetal anomalies .
Another group on the Amazon platform that has been criticised for divisive and anti-LGBT positions is the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association .
Its president , Franklin Graham , has called Satan the architect of same-sex marriage and Islam “ evil ” and “ wicked ” .
This year , several UK venues @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Graham because of such views .
These three organisations were also among the dozens of US ultra-conservative groups that openDemocracy revealed in October have spent millions around the world — and particularly in Europe — opposing sexual and reproductive rights including in the courts .
“ Be part of something bigger ” AmazonSmile invites online shoppers .
The platform lets customers donate 0.5 % of eligible purchases to charities of their choice .
It says there are more than one million groups listed on the platform , and that more people have supported @ @ @ @ @ @ @ followed by education-related charities .
It is unclear how much money the anti-LGBT groups have raised from AmazonSmile donations , as this information is not provided by the groups or by Amazon .
AmazonSmile also exists internationally , but with different groups eligible for donations .
None of the US anti-LGBT groups are listed on AmazonSmile in the UK , for example .
openDemocracy presented Amazon with a dossier of research into the anti-LGBT activities and statements of more than 40 groups listed on the US platform — and asked if the company @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Participation Agreement .
In response , an Amazon spokesperson reiterated its policy : “ Charitable organisations must meet the requirements outlined in our participation agreement to be eligible for AmazonSmile .
Organistions that engage in , support , encourage , or promote intolerance , hate , terrorism , violence , money laundering , or other illegal activities are not eligible.
” “ If at any point an organisation violates this agreement , its eligibility will be revoked , ” the spokesperson added , though they did not say whether this will happen in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since 2013 , Amazon has relied on the US Office of Foreign Assets Control and the Southern Poverty Law Center to provide the data for these determinations.
” The Southern Poverty Law Center ( SPLC ) produces annual lists of “ hate groups ” .
ADF and the Family Research Council , the two organisations that were previously removed from the US AmazonSmile programme , had been included on these lists as “ anti-LGBT hate groups ” .
Both groups have previously contested these designations .
Of the more than 40 anti-LGBT groups @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eight have been partners of the controversial World Congress of Families ( WCF ) network — which is also described by the SPLC as an “ anti-LGBT hate group ” .
Also on the Amazon platform is an Indiana “ state affiliate ” of the American Family Association ( AFA ) , which is on the SPLC ’ s current list of “ anti-LGBT hate groups ” .
The AFA has linked homosexuality with Nazism and called it “ a poor and dangerous choice ” .
It has also previously contested its description @ @ @ @ @ @ @ organisation on the donations platform , Focus on the Family , has been criticised by the SPLC for its anti-LGBT views and described as one of “ a dozen groups [ that ] help drive the religious right ’ s anti-gay crusade ” .
Seth Levi , the SPLC ’ s chief strategy officer , confirmed that Amazon uses the SPLC ’ s “ hate group designations ” to identify groups “ that do not align with the values and requirements of the Smile program ” .
He added : “ We are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , if any , Amazon uses .
We urge Amazon to ensure that none of its platforms , including retail , web services , and entertainment , are used to support and/or promulgate hateful and dehumanising content , as well as disinformation that threatens the fabric of our democracy.
” Robbie de Santos , associate director of campaigns and communications at the UK LGBT rights charity Stonewall , told openDemocracy : “ It ’ s disappointing to see organisations that campaign against LGBT equality platformed on AmazonSmile.
” Stonewall said they have messaged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s findings .
De Santos said : “ We have raised our concerns with Amazon and will continue our work until every LGBT+ person is free to be themselves worldwide.
” openDemocracy contacted the American Center for Law and Justice , American Family Association , Focus on the Family and Human Life International for comment on their compliance with AmazonSmile ’ s Participation Agreement .
None of these groups replied .
A spokesperson for the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association said the group is “ grateful to participate in the Amazon Smile program ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in unlawful discrimination and we do not promote intolerance.
” They added : “ We hope Amazon Smile will continue to respect the rights and dignity of all people , and won ’ t discriminate against faith-based groups based solely on their sincerely held religious beliefs .
”

The online shopping giant has given many anti-LGBT groups a fundraising platform despite its anti-discrimination policy.
Dozens of US-based anti-LGBT groups are fundraising on Amazon’s online donations platform — despite the company’s policies against discrimination based on sexual orientation — a new investigation from openDemocracy reveals.
Amazon has emerged as one of the few winners during the coronavirus pandemic because lockdown, infection fears and the closure of physical shops have encouraged online shopping. The company has seen profits rise almost 50%, compared to last year.
“Experience feel-good shopping” is the slogan of the AmazonSmile programme, which enables customers to donate to charities as they shop online. Amazon says the programme has facilitated $215 million in such donations since its launch in 2013.
AmazonSmile’s Participation Agreement clearly states that eligible charities cannot “engage in, support, encourage, or promote: intolerance, discrimination or discriminatory practices based on race, sex, religion, nationality, disability, sexual orientation, or age”.
However, openDemocracy research has discovered that more than 40 organisations listed on the US AmazonSmile platform publicly oppose LGBT rights and equality. Among them are groups that have:
intervened in numerous court cases in the US and internationally opposing same-sex marriage, adoption and anti-discrimination laws
claimed homosexuality “opens the door to the demonic realm” and legalising same-sex marriage “enforces” a “demonically driven, immoral agenda”
described COVID-19 as “the consequential wrath of God” and punishment for sins including society’s “proclivity toward lesbianism and homosexuality”
attacked TV shows (including American Idol) for increasing “social acceptance of homosexuality” by presenting LGBT people to viewers “as ordinary folks”
threatened staff members with immediate, “involuntary termination” if they are found to personally express support for same-sex marriage equality.
In response to openDemocracy’s findings, human rights activists said Amazon should remove these groups from its platform immediately.
“Companies, if they really walk the talk, shouldn’t be giving their platform to organisations that are working to limit the rights of other people,” said Evelyne Paradis, executive director of the LGBT advocacy group ILGA-Europe.
It’s good that Amazon has a diversity of groups on its platform, she said, but “they shouldn’t be giving space to any organisation […] that is actively fuelling hatred and/or working against the rights of other people.”
Pledges Betrayed?
Amazon has made numerous public pledges to non-discrimination and inclusion of LGBT people. For example, as an employer, it has, for several years, offered benefits to same-sex partners of its employees and covered transgender surgical procedures.
Amazon founder and CEO Jeff Bezos accepted the 2017 National Equality Award from the US LGBT rights advocacy group Human Rights Campaign. In 2012, he and his then wife publicly pledged $2.5m to the fight for same-sex marriage in Washington state.
The company’s UK website advertises partnerships with LGBT rights charities, including Stonewall’s Diversity Champions programme for inclusive workplace environments.
Two major US Christian right organisations — Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) and the Family Research Council (FRC) — were previously removed from the AmazonSmile programme amid controversy over their advocacy against equality for LGBT people.
But openDemocracy’s research reveals that these are only the tip of the iceberg and many more organisations with similar anti-LGBT track records remain on AmazonSmile.
A director of one such outfit, Human Life International (HLI), has called on people to “oppose the LGBT movement” and claimed that homosexuality is linked to paedophilia. Earlier this year, openDemocracy revealed how this group has also supported anti-abortion projects in Latin America that have been accused of spreading misinformation and manipulating vulnerable women about their health and rights.
The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), led by Trump’s personal lawyer Jay Sekulow, is also listed on the AmazonSmile platform. It has intervened in numerous US court cases opposing LGBT marriage equality. Its European office also provided legal arguments for banning abortions for Polish women in cases of fatal foetal anomalies.
Another group on the Amazon platform that has been criticised for divisive and anti-LGBT positions is the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association. Its president, Franklin Graham, has called Satan the architect of same-sex marriage and Islam “evil” and “wicked”. This year, several UK venues pulled out of hosting a tour by Graham because of such views. These three organisations were also among the dozens of US ultra-conservative groups that openDemocracy revealed in October have spent millions around the world — and particularly in Europe — opposing sexual and reproductive rights including in the courts. Helping “Hate Groups” “Be part of something bigger” AmazonSmile invites online shoppers. The platform lets customers donate 0.5% of eligible purchases to charities of their choice. It says there are more than one million groups listed on the platform, and that more people have supported animal-related non-profits over any other cause, followed by education-related charities. It is unclear how much money the anti-LGBT groups have raised from AmazonSmile donations, as this information is not provided by the groups or by Amazon. AmazonSmile also exists internationally, but with different groups eligible for donations. None of the US anti-LGBT groups are listed on AmazonSmile in the UK, for example. openDemocracy presented Amazon with a dossier of research into the anti-LGBT activities and statements of more than 40 groups listed on the US platform — and asked if the company would investigate if they had broken their Participation Agreement. In response, an Amazon spokesperson reiterated its policy: “Charitable organisations must meet the requirements outlined in our participation agreement to be eligible for AmazonSmile. Organistions that engage in, support, encourage, or promote intolerance, hate, terrorism, violence, money laundering, or other illegal activities are not eligible.” “If at any point an organisation violates this agreement, its eligibility will be revoked,” the spokesperson added, though they did not say whether this will happen in these cases. They said that “since 2013, Amazon has relied on the US Office of Foreign Assets Control and the Southern Poverty Law Center to provide the data for these determinations.” The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) produces annual lists of “hate groups”. ADF and the Family Research Council, the two organisations that were previously removed from the US AmazonSmile programme, had been included on these lists as “anti-LGBT hate groups”. Both groups have previously contested these designations. Of the more than 40 anti-LGBT groups that openDemocracy discovered on the platform, eight have been partners of the controversial World Congress of Families (WCF) network — which is also described by the SPLC as an “anti-LGBT hate group”. Also on the Amazon platform is an Indiana “state affiliate” of the American Family Association (AFA), which is on the SPLC’s current list of “anti-LGBT hate groups”. The AFA has linked homosexuality with Nazism and called it “a poor and dangerous choice”. It has also previously contested its description as a “hate group.” Another organisation on the donations platform, Focus on the Family, has been criticised by the SPLC for its anti-LGBT views and described as one of “a dozen groups [that] help drive the religious right’s anti-gay crusade”. Seth Levi, the SPLC’s chief strategy officer, confirmed that Amazon uses the SPLC’s “hate group designations” to identify groups “that do not align with the values and requirements of the Smile program”. He added: “We are not aware of other sources of information, if any, Amazon uses. We urge Amazon to ensure that none of its platforms, including retail, web services, and entertainment, are used to support and/or promulgate hateful and dehumanising content, as well as disinformation that threatens the fabric of our democracy.” Robbie de Santos, associate director of campaigns and communications at the UK LGBT rights charity Stonewall, told openDemocracy: “It’s disappointing to see organisations that campaign against LGBT equality platformed on AmazonSmile.” Stonewall said they have messaged their contacts at Amazon about openDemocracy’s findings. De Santos said: “We have raised our concerns with Amazon and will continue our work until every LGBT+ person is free to be themselves worldwide.” openDemocracy contacted the American Center for Law and Justice, American Family Association, Focus on the Family and Human Life International for comment on their compliance with AmazonSmile’s Participation Agreement. None of these groups replied. A spokesperson for the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association said the group is “grateful to participate in the Amazon Smile program” and that it “does not engage in unlawful discrimination and we do not promote intolerance.” They added: “We hope Amazon Smile will continue to respect the rights and dignity of all people, and won’t discriminate against faith-based groups based solely on their sincerely held religious beliefs.”
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--2020-12-27--Trump’s Intervention Puts Flawed But Necessary COVID Relief Bill at Risk

More than seven months after the House first passed the HEROES Act , last week both chambers of Congress finally got around to actually legislating a new COVID-19 relief bill .
For a New York minute , it looked as if the millions of Americans whose unemployment benefits stand to run out this weekend would see at least a temporary reprieve .
And then , seemingly out of nowhere , just before Christmas , Trump threatened to scuttle the whole bill unless stimulus payments to Americans — a central part of the legislative package — were increased from $ 600 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 4,000 for couples .
In the abstract , the idea of an increased stimulus payment isn ’ t a bad idea – and immediately after Trump ’ s intervention , Democrats in the House did push for the increase .
The problem , which Trump ’ s White House team know all too well , is that the bulk of the Congressional GOP won ’ t play ball with such a large stimulus .
Trump ’ s intervention , at the back end of months of painstaking congressional negotiations , can only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that , for all its flaws , is essential to protect the economy over the coming months .
Absent it , Biden will inherit not only a cascading public health emergency but also a growing economic crisis and a deepening double-dip recession .
The $ 900 billion compromise passed by large majorities in both the House and the Senate is less than a third of what the Democrats , at their most optimistic , were hoping for this year ; and , barring a public health and economic miracle , if it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , early in the new year , with enough votes to override a presidential veto ) , it will almost certainly need to be revisited and expanded months into the Biden presidency .
That said , it ’ s not all doom and gloom .
While the bill is by no means a panacea , if and when it eventually becomes law , it will bring much-needed relief to large parts of the economy and to millions of struggling individuals and families .
Let ’ s start with the bad news .
By @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new legislation is a dearth of aid to struggling cities and states , both of which are hemorrhaging sales and income tax revenue at the same time as they are staring down vastly increased unemployment payments , public health bills and other related costs due to the pandemic ’ s impact .
This fiscal crisis has already led to huge jobs and service cuts , and will , absent federal intervention , lead to far worse in the months and years to come , corroding key parts of the public infrastructure in ways @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis , the financial holes faced by local and state governments led to years of job losses , cuts to public schools and universities , and under-investments in public health , leaving America even more vulnerable to an airborne respiratory pandemic down the line .
Thirty-four states reduced spending on K-12 education , and 31 lowered their healthcare spending , according to a 2012 study by the Brookings Institute ; hundreds of thousands of local and state jobs disappeared .
And that was with huge federal interventions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Recovery and Reinvestment Act , intended to help cities and states weather the financial storm .
In 2020 , Congress has repeatedly struggled to find a path forward to prop up cities and states as they careen into crisis .
True , $ 150 billion was sent to local and state government as a part of the first COVID-relief package , the CARES Act , back in March .
It was vital in stopping the initial hemorrhaging , but it was far short of the roughly $ 1 trillion that analysts have argued @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to fully back-stop local and state governments as the pandemic plays out .
Since May , Democrats have pushed for additional large-scale assistance to localities and states .
For a while , it looked like the bipartisan cadre of Senators moving the legislation forward would be able to include significant relief of this kind .
But as the negotiations dragged on these past weeks , it became ever-clearer that McConnell ’ s leadership team was drawing a line in the sand over additional assistance — at least in the short term , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , where McConnell fears that additional relief to cities and states will be viewed by his base as a sell-out to big-spending Democrats .
As a result , the eleventh-hour legislation passed just before Christmas includes no money specifically ear-marked for this purpose .
That ’ s the downside of the legislation .
But there are also plenty of good provisions worth our attention in this $ 900 billion package .
In addition to the hundreds of billions in assistance for small businesses , and the $ 166 billion being set aside for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , tens of billions of dollars have been allotted to assisting struggling schools and to extend enhanced unemployment benefits through March — though Trump ’ s last minute intervention , preventing the bill from becoming law before Christmas , makes it inevitable there will be at least a weeks ’ long pause in vital unemployment benefit payments to millions of Americans as 2020 ends and 2021 begins .
Even if Congress overrides Trump ’ s veto , the break in payments could prove financially calamitous to large numbers of Americans who have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during the pandemic .
But it ’ s not only unemployment benefits that are at risk because of Trump ’ s ongoing efforts at political and economic sabotage , and his seemingly unquenchable desire to leave Biden with as much chaos and economic dislocation as possible .
There is $ 25 billion earmarked for rental assistance and $ 20 billion for vaccine distribution .
If the bill becomes law , tens of billions of dollars will be used to increase nutritional assistance programs , including SNAP — a key part of the safety @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been in the Trump administration ’ s crosshairs .
There are also $ 45 billion allotted to the transit sector — most of it to be used to keep airline employees employed and also to shore up public transport systems that have , in the absence of relief , been contemplating cuts so deep they would , in effect , destroy many urban bus and train networks .
In the final negotiations , Democrats even managed to include $ 15 billion in assistance for arts institutions — a vital addition , given the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and other cultural centers find themselves in after nearly a year in which they have been forced to navigate the pandemic with far too little federal assistance .
Some of that money will go to create two new Smithsonian museums : a Women ’ s History museum and a National Museum of the American Latino .
As with all packages of this scale — the legislation is 5,000 pages in length — individual senators managed to include provisions that don ’ t really have much to do with the crisis at hand .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ pushed by outgoing Sen. Lamar Alexander ( R-Tennessee ) , to outlaw “ surprise billing ” tactics by medical providers .
And there ’ s another provision , pushed by Sen , Thom Tillis ( R-North Carolina ) , significantly toughening up the criminal penalties for people breaking copyright laws through illegally streaming materials to make a commercial profit .
This is the sausage-making process in action .
Enough senators felt , at the end of the day , that they had buy-in , and that their pet issues were being addressed .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ recent years , that in itself was an achievement .
Now , the entire package has been put at risk .
If Trump continues to stonewall , and if Congress doesn ’ t pass the bill again by a veto-proof majority , Biden and his economic team will face a five-alarm economic and poverty emergency as soon as they take office .
They will have to find ways to cajole Congress into passing new relief legislation ; and , at the same time , they will have to convince legislators to revisit the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and state governments .
Absent these actions , the job losses and the economic pain will mount even after the broader public health crisis begins to wane .

More than seven months after the House first passed the HEROES Act, last week both chambers of Congress finally got around to actually legislating a new COVID-19 relief bill. For a New York minute, it looked as if the millions of Americans whose unemployment benefits stand to run out this weekend would see at least a temporary reprieve.
And then, seemingly out of nowhere, just before Christmas, Trump threatened to scuttle the whole bill unless stimulus payments to Americans — a central part of the legislative package — were increased from $600 to $2,000 for an individual and $4,000 for couples.
In the abstract, the idea of an increased stimulus payment isn’t a bad idea – and immediately after Trump’s intervention, Democrats in the House did push for the increase. The problem, which Trump’s White House team know all too well, is that the bulk of the Congressional GOP won’t play ball with such a large stimulus. Trump’s intervention, at the back end of months of painstaking congressional negotiations, can only either delay or torpedo a relief package that, for all its flaws, is essential to protect the economy over the coming months. Absent it, Biden will inherit not only a cascading public health emergency but also a growing economic crisis and a deepening double-dip recession.
The $900 billion compromise passed by large majorities in both the House and the Senate is less than a third of what the Democrats, at their most optimistic, were hoping for this year; and, barring a public health and economic miracle, if it is signed into law (or passed again, early in the new year, with enough votes to override a presidential veto), it will almost certainly need to be revisited and expanded months into the Biden presidency.
That said, it’s not all doom and gloom. While the bill is by no means a panacea, if and when it eventually becomes law, it will bring much-needed relief to large parts of the economy and to millions of struggling individuals and families.
Let’s start with the bad news. By far the most glaring failing of the new legislation is a dearth of aid to struggling cities and states, both of which are hemorrhaging sales and income tax revenue at the same time as they are staring down vastly increased unemployment payments, public health bills and other related costs due to the pandemic’s impact. This fiscal crisis has already led to huge jobs and service cuts, and will, absent federal intervention, lead to far worse in the months and years to come, corroding key parts of the public infrastructure in ways that will harm low-income Americans.
In the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, the financial holes faced by local and state governments led to years of job losses, cuts to public schools and universities, and under-investments in public health, leaving America even more vulnerable to an airborne respiratory pandemic down the line. Thirty-four states reduced spending on K-12 education, and 31 lowered their healthcare spending, according to a 2012 study by the Brookings Institute; hundreds of thousands of local and state jobs disappeared. And that was with huge federal interventions, under the aegis of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, intended to help cities and states weather the financial storm.
In 2020, Congress has repeatedly struggled to find a path forward to prop up cities and states as they careen into crisis. True, $150 billion was sent to local and state government as a part of the first COVID-relief package, the CARES Act, back in March. It was vital in stopping the initial hemorrhaging, but it was far short of the roughly $1 trillion that analysts have argued, since the spring, is needed to fully back-stop local and state governments as the pandemic plays out.
Since May, Democrats have pushed for additional large-scale assistance to localities and states. For a while, it looked like the bipartisan cadre of Senators moving the legislation forward would be able to include significant relief of this kind. But as the negotiations dragged on these past weeks, it became ever-clearer that McConnell’s leadership team was drawing a line in the sand over additional assistance — at least in the short term, in the run-up to the Georgia Senate elections, where McConnell fears that additional relief to cities and states will be viewed by his base as a sell-out to big-spending Democrats. As a result, the eleventh-hour legislation passed just before Christmas includes no money specifically ear-marked for this purpose.
That’s the downside of the legislation. But there are also plenty of good provisions worth our attention in this $900 billion package.
In addition to the hundreds of billions in assistance for small businesses, and the $166 billion being set aside for direct stimulus payments to individuals and families, tens of billions of dollars have been allotted to assisting struggling schools and to extend enhanced unemployment benefits through March — though Trump’s last minute intervention, preventing the bill from becoming law before Christmas, makes it inevitable there will be at least a weeks’ long pause in vital unemployment benefit payments to millions of Americans as 2020 ends and 2021 begins.
Even if Congress overrides Trump’s veto, the break in payments could prove financially calamitous to large numbers of Americans who have been pushed to the brink of economic catastrophe during the pandemic.
But it’s not only unemployment benefits that are at risk because of Trump’s ongoing efforts at political and economic sabotage, and his seemingly unquenchable desire to leave Biden with as much chaos and economic dislocation as possible. There is $25 billion earmarked for rental assistance and $20 billion for vaccine distribution. If the bill becomes law, tens of billions of dollars will be used to increase nutritional assistance programs, including SNAP — a key part of the safety net, and one that has long been in the Trump administration’s crosshairs. There are also $45 billion allotted to the transit sector — most of it to be used to keep airline employees employed and also to shore up public transport systems that have, in the absence of relief, been contemplating cuts so deep they would, in effect, destroy many urban bus and train networks.
In the final negotiations, Democrats even managed to include $15 billion in assistance for arts institutions — a vital addition, given the dire straits so many museums, theaters and other cultural centers find themselves in after nearly a year in which they have been forced to navigate the pandemic with far too little federal assistance. Some of that money will go to create two new Smithsonian museums: a Women’s History museum and a National Museum of the American Latino.
As with all packages of this scale — the legislation is 5,000 pages in length — individual senators managed to include provisions that don’t really have much to do with the crisis at hand. There’s a strong provision, pushed by outgoing Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tennessee), to outlaw “surprise billing” tactics by medical providers. And there’s another provision, pushed by Sen, Thom Tillis (R-North Carolina), significantly toughening up the criminal penalties for people breaking copyright laws through illegally streaming materials to make a commercial profit.
This is the sausage-making process in action. Enough senators felt, at the end of the day, that they had buy-in, and that their pet issues were being addressed. Given how sclerotic Congress has been in recent years, that in itself was an achievement.
Now, the entire package has been put at risk. If Trump continues to stonewall, and if Congress doesn’t pass the bill again by a veto-proof majority, Biden and his economic team will face a five-alarm economic and poverty emergency as soon as they take office. They will have to find ways to cajole Congress into passing new relief legislation; and, at the same time, they will have to convince legislators to revisit the ideas of broad financial assistance for city and state governments. Absent these actions, the job losses and the economic pain will mount even after the broader public health crisis begins to wane.
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.