newrepublic--2020-12-22--Congress Doesn’t Care About Your Surprise Ambulance Bill

While campaigning this spring in the Democratic primary for Missouri ’ s first congressional district , then–insurgent candidate Cori Bush found herself struggling to breathe : a hallmark symptom caused by the novel coronavirus that had originated mere months before in Wuhan , China .
While now Representative-elect Bush ’ s case would soon prove severe enough to require hospitalization , she was initially terrified to call an ambulance—acquiescing only when her friend Dr. Victoria Dooley insisted on calling one after hearing Bush ’ s strained efforts to describe what was happening to her over the phone .
“ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t afford it , ” Bush recounted on Twitter .
“ Nobody should have to make that decision.
” An untold number of patients in the United States are in that same frightening position , and their anxieties are well founded : The cost of ambulance rides make up more than half of so-called “ surprise medical bills , ” as patients get slapped with unexpected financial penalties for services they didn ’ t realize were outside their insurers ’ provider networks until payment comes due .
While around 20 percent of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ medical bill in a given year , the practice appears particularly common in ambulance services : Around one-quarter of all trips turn out to be well above what the insurer is willing to pay , foisting the balance due onto the patient .
An investigation by Kaiser Health News found that these charges frequently top thousands of dollars , often for rides of just a few miles .
One formerly unhoused journalist writing for The American Prospect described how $ 4,000 in outstanding ambulance bills damaged her credit and made it more difficult @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But now—as Congress finally seems poised to ban many forms of surprise billing after a years-long bipartisan effort repeatedly scuttled by industry interests—ground ambulance transport appears to be excluded from the bill .
While the legislation set for implementation in 2022 will mandate that providers and insurers negotiate most payments among themselves without involving the patient , the status quo for ground ambulance service will remain unchanged ( even as air ambulances , their rarer but pricier cousins , will be covered by the law ) .
The reasons reflect a basic failure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.S. , and how we came to push those costs onto patients instead .
It ’ s an already dire problem that will surely worsen in the aftershock of the Covid-19 pandemic .

What arguably precipitated the dizzying spike that so frequently leaves unknowing patients with four-figure bills today was the Great Recession of 2008, which drained the coffers of local government as incomes plummeted and tax bases dried up. As described in The American Prospect, while “too big to fail” investment banks were chastened by tighter regulations in the aftermath, it was a feeding frenzy for private equity firms. In the years after the financial crash, private equity firms more than quadrupled their holdings, topping $4 trillion; along the way, they bought up a significant number of ambulance providers. The result has been nothing short of the total transformation of what was once a quasi-public service into a profit-hungry industry.
Unlike the community-based ambulance services of the past—even those that joined forces to form larger firms—private equity firms lack a medical mission. They buy up companies and do whatever possible to extract ever-higher profits from those acquisitions, particularly in cases of “leveraged buyouts,” in which they saddle a firm with the debt from its own sale. In the case of ambulances, there was an obvious way to cash in: Jack up the prices and hold patients themselves responsible for whatever their insurer wouldn’t pay. While Medicare and Medicaid obstructed this strategy by capping reimbursements for ambulance rides at around 60 to 70 percent of what private insurers paid, private equity firms happily billed other plans and uninsured people as much as they could. One patient I spoke to was bilked for $3,000 for a ride of less than a mile during a flare-up of Crohn’s disease; another paid $2,400 to be transported seven miles after getting hit by a car. In both cases, the patients sarcastically admitted the very obvious premise that the for-profit ambulance industry is built upon: In the throes of serious health emergencies, they weren’t exactly in a position to shop around for deals! And even if they had the ability to do a round of comparison shopping, who the hell would want to?
It should be obvious, but it bears repeating: Ambulance users are, by definition, people in dire straits. This is perhaps why private ambulance companies reportedly focus on compelling their workers to get clients to sign paperwork accepting responsibility even while in the grip of a health crisis. According to an investigative report by The New York Times on the impact of private equity on emergency services, one ambulance provider began displaying posters, post-acquisition, imploring medics to get a signature: “Almost always, if the patient is alert, they will be able to sign,” said one cartoon man on the display. For patients who couldn’t fork over exorbitant sums—or whose families couldn’t, in the event of their death—private equity–owned ambulance services pushed bills into collections faster than their previous incarnations. Kaiser Health News theorizes that all of this is intentional, noting that ambulance companies rarely contract with any insurers anymore, so as to preserve their billing practices.


newrepublic--2020-12-22--Flight of the Barr Bros

Flight of the Barr Bros

Like Levi , Rabbitt may understand that his future would be well served by the appearance of some distance from his benefactor .
A recent story in The New York Times conspicuously noted that Rabbitt had “ pushed back ” before Barr relaxed an internal policy on investigating election fraud cases .
In the scheme of things , this was among the least objectionable things Barr did with Rabbitt by his side—a two-year period during which Rabbitt worked with Barr on his misleading summary of the Mueller report and shielded Barr from questions about the department ’ s interventions in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Some of the Barr Bros have been less adept in their reputation management .
Bill Hughes is the associate deputy attorney general who oversees the department ’ s work on coronavirus-related misconduct ( an under-recognized failure ) .
Hughes had never worked at the department before coming over from the White House in April 2019—unless you count a summer internship nearly 15 years ago , which you should not—and gave testimony before Congress over the summer that suggested that he knows close to nothing about how criminal prosecutions work .
Patrick Hovakimian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deputy attorney general , and although he at least had some prior experience as a DOJ prosecutor , he also may have broken the law last year by playing an integral role in the intelligence community ’ s retaliation against a DOJ whistleblower .
Once you spot the type , the Barr Bros become hard to miss .
Craig Carpenito is the U.S. attorney for New Jersey and was supposed to replace Geoffrey Berman , the U.S. attorney in Manhattan , when Barr lied to the public about firing Berman back in June @ @ @ @ @ @ @ force into price-gouging that has produced fewer than 20 prosecutions despite what his office recently described as “ hundreds upon hundreds ” of complaints .
Michael Sherwin was a federal prosecutor in Miami who reportedly impressed Barr at a meeting last year before becoming the acting U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia in May ; since then , he has overseen the department ’ s ridiculous motion to dismiss the Flynn case , as well as its self-defeating attempt to stop the publication of John Bolton ’ s book .
In September @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s deputies , but four years ago , he was one level above a line attorney in the DOJ ’ s Fraud Section , where I used to work ; in the meantime , he accidentally called one of his own prosecutions into question and lost a major trial .

The relative youth and inexperience of the Barr Bros served a clear purpose for the attorney general. In June, a former senior DOJ official during the George H.W. Bush administration testified before Congress about how Barr had “a well-developed, scalable process” for exerting control in the department—namely, by “using a cadre of ambitious conservative lawyers to second-guess or completely take over decision making from experienced career attorneys,” who could then “look forward to the rewards of career advancement, including greater responsibilities, higher positions, and in more than a few cases to eventually receiving the reward of a life-tenured federal judgeship.”
With the Biden administration on the horizon, many of the Barr Bros are likely to exit the government for the private sector, despite having been party to some of the worst lawyering—not just morally and ethically but as a matter of basic competence—in the department’s history. It worked for Rod Rosenstein, who oversaw the department’s reprehensible family separation policy, and for John Bash, a onetime U.S. attorney who oversaw one of the key border districts during the same policy. After all, the private legal sector is home to lots of people whose moral commitments are dubious, and at pretty much every prominent law firm, white men have a considerable leg up, irrespective of their professional merits.
The Barr Bros may be with us for a long time, particularly in the absence of any meaningful effort to rummage through the wreckage of the last four years. After some time in private practice, and after memories of Trump’s worst excesses have faded, the Barr Bros could (like Barr himself) cycle back into the government in a future Republican administration—next time in even higher positions of authority and having learned all of the wrong lessons under Barr.


newrepublic--2020-12-24--Labor Power Is the Key to Racial Equity

Labor Power Is the Key to Racial Equity

When President-elect Joe Biden takes office in January , he ’ ll inherit a country that ’ s riven with divisions along ethnic and socio-economic lines .
The central tenets of his “ Build Back Better ” plan suggest that his administration will confront these divisions head on and seek to ameliorate them in a variety of ways .
One of the guiding principles involves fostering a stronger sense of race equity—a goal that ’ s as large and amorphous as it is ambitious .
But there are short , sharp steps the president can take to get his arms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have more hard-dollar value than organizing the working class—all of it , Black , brown , and white .
It will go a long way toward bringing people together .
Or at least it would put them in the same union halls out of individual self-interest .
The single best way to begin to spur this solidarity , as well as the economic benefits that would follow , is to push the same Protecting the Right to Organize Act , which the House passed in January .
There ’ s reason to believe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : He may be the first pro-union Democratic president in our adult lifetimes—or at least the first to say , in a meeting of CEOs , “ I ’ m a union guy.
” That ’ s the kind of thing that Obama or Clinton or Carter would have only said , if at all , on Labor Day , at a labor rally .
At some point in the next four years—yes , even if there is bad news from Georgia—the Senate could flip and open wider doors to shoring up labor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can at least reintroduce labor law reform as a race equity measure , maybe the race equity measure , now that there are civil rights laws aplenty on the books .
After all , Martin Luther King Jr. , who died leading a labor strike , regarded it that way ; the March on Washington in 1963 was a labor funded event , conceived in part by Bayard Rustin , who was working for the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations ( AFL-CIO ) .
But let us also consider @ @ @ @ @ @ @ form of Black reparations , actually on offer ; while it is not true Black reparations , it is at least a share of capital wealth .
In 2018 , the Center for American Progress compared the wealth of union-member and non-member households and uncovered some interesting disparities when those households were broken out along racial lines .
For Black Americans , the difference is remarkable : Median union household wealth is $ 22,106 ; the non-union median is $ 2,371 .
And for Hispanic workers , the wealth effect of membership is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ union households and $ 3,093 for non union .

When President-elect Joe Biden takes office in January, he’ll inherit a country that’s riven with divisions along ethnic and socio-economic lines. The central tenets of his “Build Back Better” plan suggest that his administration will confront these divisions head on and seek to ameliorate them in a variety of ways. One of the guiding principles involves fostering a stronger sense of race equity—a goal that’s as large and amorphous as it is ambitious. But there are short, sharp steps the president can take to get his arms around the task. And nothing would have more hard-dollar value than organizing the working class—all of it, Black, brown, and white. It will go a long way toward bringing people together. Or at least it would put them in the same union halls out of individual self-interest.
The single best way to begin to spur this solidarity, as well as the economic benefits that would follow, is to push the same Protecting the Right to Organize Act, which the House passed in January. There’s reason to believe Biden might be inclined to do so: He may be the first pro-union Democratic president in our adult lifetimes—or at least the first to say, in a meeting of CEOs, “I’m a union guy.” That’s the kind of thing that Obama or Clinton or Carter would have only said, if at all, on Labor Day, at a labor rally.
At some point in the next four years—yes, even if there is bad news from Georgia—the Senate could flip and open wider doors to shoring up labor rights. In the meantime, we can at least reintroduce labor law reform as a race equity measure, maybe the race equity measure, now that there are civil rights laws aplenty on the books. After all, Martin Luther King Jr., who died leading a labor strike, regarded it that way; the March on Washington in 1963 was a labor funded event, conceived in part by Bayard Rustin, who was working for the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO). But let us also consider a bill like PRO as a practical form of Black reparations, actually on offer; while it is not true Black reparations, it is at least a share of capital wealth. In 2018, the Center for American Progress compared the wealth of union-member and non-member households and uncovered some interesting disparities when those households were broken out along racial lines. For Black Americans, the difference is remarkable: Median union household wealth is $22,106; the non-union median is $2,371. And for Hispanic workers, the wealth effect of membership is just as great: $33,696 for union households and $3,093 for non union.


newrepublic--2020-12-24--Revenge Is Sweet in Promising Young Woman

Sexual violence and misogyny have for so long provided mainstream film and television with a wellspring of entertaining tropes , that when writers and directors set out to examine their workings directly , they mistrust flamboyance .
Some of the most successful recent treatments of the subject are characterized by a restraint that borders on austere : Unbelievable wrestles crime drama into a rigorous , sensitive feminist form ; Kitty Green ’ s tense , miniaturist The Assistant restricts itself to the perspective of the titular employee of a Weinstein-like figure we never see head-on , demonstrating in detail how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ muffles all opposition .
Jay Roach ’ s Bombshell showed the pitfalls of attempting a glitzier , more fun approach .
When Karyn Kusama and Diablo Cody turned rape-revenge into exuberant comedy horror in Jennifer ’ s Body back in 2009 , nearly no one got the joke for most of a decade .
Yet writer-director Emerald Fennell , best known till now as an actor and the showrunner on the second season of the glam-assassin series Killing Eve , blasts into this territory with delicious nonchalance .
Her feature debut , Promising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ often called rape culture through a brilliantly queasy blend of genres : revenge thriller , social satire , farce , romantic comedy .
“ What is this , the ’ 90s ?
” a young man jokes to a friend who appears to have committed an especially cheesy kind of sex crime .
Fennell ’ s film revels in a winking , sleazy glamour that for me recalled those thrillers of the 1980s and ’ 90s that capitalized on the sexual and professional anxieties of their time , like Disclosure , or Fatal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one was made now , though , because its emblematic villains are not sexually aggressive career women but precisely those decent and bemused leading-man types that Michael Douglas once specialized in : men who work hard and make money and , once they find a good woman , settle down and strive to treat her right , but whose very understandable frailties can still make them easy prey for a certain sort of harpy .
Promising Young Woman is in part a parable of the nice guy , nicely educated—the kind of young @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and should never be squandered over a little thing like rape .
In the opening scene , three dudes drinking in a bar notice a woman slumped against a red banquette , head unsteady on her shoulders , legs akimbo , white underwear on show .
Her condition inspires disgust and condemnation in the first man , predatory lust in the second , while the doe-eyed third , played by Adam Brody , looks pained by their boorishness and heads over to see if she needs help .
No prizes for guessing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lure her to his place and try to assault her .
The woman herself , Cassandra Thomas ( Carey Mulligan ) , doesn ’ t need to guess ; as her name suggests , she has been cursed with clear-sightedness .
And it turns out she ’ s sober , and she does this every week .
She sends the Brody character into a panic by snapping her eyes open and sitting up to confront him mid-fumble .
He is the rule and not the exception : Every single time , it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ near-unconscious bait .
When she gets home in the morning , she commemorates them with a tally mark in a little notebook .

Promising Young Woman isn’t demonizing anyone, and it’s not about how the real baddies are hard to spot. It’s about more widespread hypocrisies, about what behavior is collectively encouraged and rewarded, and whose feelings about it must be indulged and cosseted afterward. People reassure each other that nothing is their fault. One man, toddlerlike, howls, “I didn’t do anything!” A woman notes over wine that in the end men like a good girl, and you shouldn’t drink too much if you don’t want something bad to happen; putting his misdemeanors (and their casualties) behind him, a man tells his bride, “You are my moral compass.” In her adventures, Cassie encounters only one person who has come to the same conclusions she has, and feels intense remorse for his complicity. He calls this an epiphany; others term it “a psychotic episode.”
A sense of unreality pervades the movie: the colors, the set pieces, even the way Cassie never registers fear in confronting a would-be attacker alone at night. Mulligan appears slightly miscast, in another deliberate distancing tactic. She’s a few years older than her character, a gap emphasized by her blonde braids and little-girlish dresses and the dollhouse kitsch of the family home she’s still stuck in. She looks wary and wry and jaded, out of step with everyone around her. The film never lets you forget how exhausting and jarring her experience is. The distancing can be risky: Audiences aren’t invited to identify with Cassie in the way they are with the protagonist of Get Out, who only gradually realizes the horrors he’s being drawn into. Cassie is nearly always ahead, and Fennell, aware of the perils of misdirected empathy, seems to want viewers to think more than to feel.
Whereas Michaela Coel’s I May Destroy You, probably the most ambitious recent exploration of similar themes, drops its viewers into a succession of sometimes warring perspectives, Fennell goes a different route. Her film has a bracing approach to the supposed conflict between psychological nuance and moral clarity that has often mired public discussions of sexual violence. “So you’re perfect, right?” a man asks Cassie after she challenges him. “You’ve never done anything you’re ashamed of?” She doesn’t answer, but the film does. It’s possible to let certain universal truths—that everyone is fallible, sex and communication are complicated, and so on—go without saying yet again. You might wait to repeat them until after the particular wrong under discussion has been addressed, or at least acknowledged. Like a contemporary Antigone, Cassie feels compelled to seek justice even when no one around her can recognize it as such. Not an eye for an eye, just due respect and remembrance.


newrepublic--2020-12-24--We’re Outsourcing Our Self-Awareness to Silicon Valley

Would you like to give your friends and loved ones the gift of surveillance this holiday season ?
Your options abound .
The market for “ smart ” devices is booming : There are smart toothbrushes that monitor your dental hygiene , smart beds that measure how you sleep , and smart forks that watch your every bite .
This intimate data can be helpful , steering you toward a healthier and more productive life .
But it is also deeply interesting to others listening in .
In the digital economy , we are urged to outsource all manner of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ complained , for example , that reliance on navigational apps has sapped our native sense of orientation .
We no longer have to pay attention to our bearings or geographical markers since Waze or Google Maps will do it for us .
Now , an ambitious new smart product takes this trend a frightening step further .
Amazon ’ s Halo fitness tracker not only measures your heart rate and exercise routines but also your moods ; it records your voice , analyzes your tone , and issues detailed reports of your emotional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Times media critic Kara Swisher recently tried it out : “ That first day a vexed emoji told me I was ‘ stern ’ or ‘ discouraged ’ for 16 percent of the day .
‘ You had one phrase that sounded restrained and sad ’ for 1.6 seconds at 12:30 p.m. … But 8 percent of the day , including for 14.4 seconds at exactly 11:41:41 a.m. , I was ‘ satisfied ’ … Later , for 1.2 seconds at 7:18:30 p.m. , I was ‘ afraid , panicked or overwhelmed .
@ @

But if Halo is of little use to me, who is it principally for? Amazon has vowed that it will not pillage the data collected; Halo spies only for you. For now. But it establishes an important precedent and inures us to constant surveillance. Thus, it opens the door for hungry marketers. Surveillance is at the heart of the digital economy; it’s what makes, or promises to make, digital services superior. The more we divulge, the more precisely, efficiently, and effectively these services help us. They can tell you what you want before you know you want it. On the promise of personalized service and greater convenience, we invariably comply.
Why might marketers want to know about your emotional states? How are they benefited by knowing you are sad for 1.6 seconds at 12:30 p.m.? Marketers can take advantage of you in such moments and pitch products and services that you are susceptible to. As media scholar Zeynep Tufekci argues, it’s but a short step from identifying your vulnerabilities to creating them. If Amazon determines you are depressed, for example, it may know exactly what movies you will indulge in, what snack foods you will load up on—what “retail therapy” soothes you at that moment.
This is the tip of the iceberg. Data analysis is an esoteric science, and we have little idea of the conclusions drawn about us, how marketers evaluate and manipulate us in subtle ways. Consider that a retailer determined that buying felt pads to keep your furniture from scratching the floor is a preeminent marker of credit-worthiness. Facebook, meanwhile, has studied patterns of social media use to determine when we are falling in love or breaking up. They wouldn’t do this if there wasn’t money to be made with the information.


newrepublic--2020-12-24--Simply Talking About the Pandemic the Right Way Can Help Rebuild American Democracy

The Biden administration might look to the messaging of German Chancellor Angela Merkel , who has led an effective Covid-19 response even as the country ’ s swelling anti-democratic right kicks sand in the wheels .
From the start , Merkel has affirmed that there is nothing inevitable about the pandemic ’ s course .
At the core of her rhetoric lies the firmly stated conviction that Germans will determine the human and economic consequences of Covid-19 for themselves .
“ We are not doomed , ” she explained in March , “ to passively accept the spread of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ live not by compulsion , but rather by shared knowledge and collaboration.
” Germany has recently reintroduced tough public health restrictions nationwide to deal with the pandemic ’ s second wave .
Although Berlin ’ s Covid-19 response has been broadly supported by 85 to 90 percent of Germans , right-wing criticism of a “ Covid dictatorship ” is mounting .
The chancellor appears to be taking this in stride .
Speaking to the Bundestag on October 29 , Merkel admitted that the pandemic was a “ severe test ” for German democracy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ robust , reality-based public debate about the course to be taken would strengthen the country ’ s democratic fabric .
“ How things proceed is in our hands.
” The democratic potential of health messaging is clearest when we turn to the most explosive Covid-19 flashpoint in the United States : individual autonomy .
Polarization has made it seem to Americans that anarchy ( freedom ) or strict lockdown ( tyranny ) are the only alternatives .
Not so in places like British Columbia or Sweden , where leaders combined relatively wide latitude @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for making tough ethical decisions during the pandemic .
These strategies were not perfect , and both jurisdictions have suffered second waves worse than the first .
But public trust remains high .
Even as additional restrictions are introduced , officials continue to prioritize autonomous decision-making .
Good messaging has been the linchpin of these strategies .
Rather than seeking to regulate or issue guidance for all social behaviors , officials in these jurisdictions have mostly trusted the public to make good decisions—and , most importantly , gave them the tools to do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ British Columbia , government messaging has reinforced consistent and useful principles for safe socializing : staying physically distant , wearing masks , keeping gatherings small , and meeting outdoors when possible .
Effective communications in these territories have allowed citizens to keep as much individual autonomy as possible while encouraging them to feel more responsible for and invested in the collective Covid-19 response .

President-elect Joe Biden has already indicated that better communication will be a priority. He has pledged “consistent, reliable, trusted, detailed nationwide guidance” from a single reputable source as part of his strategy for a stronger Covid-19 response. Clarity, however, is only half the battle. By themselves, facts and clearly stated health measures can’t fend off fatigue, help people feel more invested in their neighbors’ welfare, or remind citizens that they are still sovereign, still in control of their shared futures. You can’t build solidarity with science alone.
Public health officials should be empowered to deliver clear scientific guidance—but once that hurdle is cleared, it will remain crucial for Biden and Vice President–elect Kamala Harris to explicitly articulate the ways in which Covid-19 is at once a challenge and opportunity for American democracy. This is what leaders have done in both Taiwan and South Korea, two jurisdictions with extremely effective Covid-19 responses as well as resilient democratic cultures. Taiwan’s digital minister, Audrey Tang, recently observed that Covid-19 “actually strengthened our democracy.” President Tsai Ing-wen has argued, “It is possible to control the spread of the virus without sacrificing our most important democratic principles … democracy is in our DNA.” Similar rhetoric has been deployed in South Korea, which held one of the world’s first pandemic elections in April—and broke turnout records in the process. Prime Minister Chung Sye-kyun noted that the country had “turned the crisis into an opportunity for democracy to mature.”
South Korea and Taiwan exemplify the democratic potential of public health in more ways than one. Contrary to popular belief, their Covid-19 success is owed not to “Confucian cohesion” but rather the democratic ability to learn from mistakes and make necessary course corrections. After struggling during the SARS outbreak in 2003 and MERS in 2015 with public compliance and confusing communications, both states reimagined their public health institutions with clearer chains of command and better messaging capacity. This, too, is an illustration of democratic power, the capacity for reinvention and renewal.


newrepublic--2020-12-24--Carbon Capture Is Not a Climate Savior

Carbon Capture Is Not a Climate Savior

“ It ’ s important to know how many gigatons we can take out of the air and the economic efficiency , ” Georgetown University ’ s Olúfẹ́mi Táíwò , whose research explores the intersections of climate justice and colonialism , told me .
In a forthcoming primer on carbon dioxide removal , or CDR , Harvard University researchers Andrew Bergman and Toly Rinberg suggest that around 1 metric gigaton of removal per year , worldwide , is consistent with a pathway toward capping warming at 1.5 degrees Celsius—far less than the 5 to 15 metric gigatons suggested by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Climate Change , or IPCC .
Even more modest targets will require technology that is currently quite expensive , probably in addition to large quantities of land for carbon sinks .
The Integrated Assessment Models , or IAMs , used by the IPCC to design net-zero pledges pose deceptively simple answers to this challenge .
In assuming a continued annual GDP growth of around 2 percent , year on year , carbon capture technologies that are expensive to deploy now will get cheaper in the future .
So long as our future selves @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ll be cheaper and easier to suck up carbon at evermore impressive scales down the line—more so , say , than phasing out fossil fuels and deploying lots of renewables in the next 20 years .
We don ’ t actually know , though , if societies getting richer means they ’ ll be able to capture more carbon—particularly given the stubborn fact that GDP and emissions tend to rise together .
Carbon capture , or negative emissions , can mean many different things .
So-called “ natural climate solutions ” involve things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ restoration , or ( controversially ) agriculture-based soil sequestration .
The Green New Deal resolution introduced to Congress last year backed this approach , citing the need for “ removing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere and reducing pollution by restoring natural ecosystems through proven low-tech solutions that increase soil carbon storage , such as land preservation and afforestation.
” But there are other approaches , too .
Among the most frequently invoked in climate modeling is Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage , or BECCS .
This relies on harvesting new carbon-sucking crops @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the resulting emissions through machines that filter out emissions from where the power is generated .
And in direct air capture , machines that look like air conditioners suck carbon down from the sky and inject it into rock formations or soft drinks , among other uses .

“It’s important to know how many gigatons we can take out of the air and the economic efficiency,” Georgetown University’s Olúfẹ́mi Táíwò, whose research explores the intersections of climate justice and colonialism, told me. In a forthcoming primer on carbon dioxide removal, or CDR, Harvard University researchers Andrew Bergman and Toly Rinberg suggest that around 1 metric gigaton of removal per year, worldwide, is consistent with a pathway toward capping warming at 1.5 degrees Celsius—far less than the 5 to 15 metric gigatons suggested by the models used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC.
Even more modest targets will require technology that is currently quite expensive, probably in addition to large quantities of land for carbon sinks. The Integrated Assessment Models, or IAMs, used by the IPCC to design net-zero pledges pose deceptively simple answers to this challenge. In assuming a continued annual GDP growth of around 2 percent, year on year, carbon capture technologies that are expensive to deploy now will get cheaper in the future. So long as our future selves and countries are richer, it’ll be cheaper and easier to suck up carbon at evermore impressive scales down the line—more so, say, than phasing out fossil fuels and deploying lots of renewables in the next 20 years. We don’t actually know, though, if societies getting richer means they’ll be able to capture more carbon—particularly given the stubborn fact that GDP and emissions tend to rise together.
Carbon capture, or negative emissions, can mean many different things. So-called “natural climate solutions” involve things like tree planting, grassland and wetland restoration, or (controversially) agriculture-based soil sequestration. The Green New Deal resolution introduced to Congress last year backed this approach, citing the need for “removing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere and reducing pollution by restoring natural ecosystems through proven low-tech solutions that increase soil carbon storage, such as land preservation and afforestation.” But there are other approaches, too. Among the most frequently invoked in climate modeling is Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage, or BECCS. This relies on harvesting new carbon-sucking crops like switchgrass for fuel, then capturing the resulting emissions through machines that filter out emissions from where the power is generated. And in direct air capture, machines that look like air conditioners suck carbon down from the sky and inject it into rock formations or soft drinks, among other uses.


newrepublic--2020-12-25--Operation Santa Is a Horror Story About American Poverty

On a cloudy Christmas Eve in 1907 , Mary McGann , a 10-year-old Irish girl living in Hell ’ s Kitchen with her younger brother and mother , wrote a letter to Santa Claus .
“ I am very glad that you are coming around tonight .
My little brother would like you to bring him a wagon which I know you can not afford .
I will ask you to bring him whatever you think… .
Please bring me something nice ( sic ) what you think best , ” she asked .
“ P.S .
Please do not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made it to Santa ; it was discovered 90 years later stashed in between the bricks of the tenement ’ s fireplace .
But that same year , the New York City branch of the USPS informally implemented “ Operation Santa , ” an unusually whimsical government program that allowed Postal Service employees ( and volunteers with the “ Santa Claus Association ” ) to respond , as Santa , to the thousands of New York children attempting to contact St. Nick .
Postmaster Frank Hitchcock would integrate the program in 1912 to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , making “ Operation Santa ” an official government program .
After 1940 , the program allowed charitable organizations , private firms , and laypeople to “ adopt ” the letters of kids living in poverty and fulfill their Christmas wishes .
The film Miracle on 34th Street references the endeavor , and Johnny Carson made a habit of reading some of the letters on The Tonight Show .
The program has grown to the point where it connected 13,000 children to donors , a total that may well be doubled in 2020 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been digitized , and if you ’ re interested in adopting a letter , you can go to the Operation Santa website and browse through the hopes and desires of thousands of children across the country .
But what these letters demonstrate , far better than any PSA or statistical model , is how violent American poverty truly is .
They also provide a counterbalance to the ways childhood poverty is depicted in popular media , where poor kids often serve as a way for a protagonist to demonstrate their generosity , from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the demented poverty porn of the holiday pop hit “ Christmas Shoes .
”

On a cloudy Christmas Eve in 1907, Mary McGann, a 10-year-old Irish girl living in Hell’s Kitchen with her younger brother and mother, wrote a letter to Santa Claus. “I am very glad that you are coming around tonight. My little brother would like you to bring him a wagon which I know you cannot afford. I will ask you to bring him whatever you think…. Please bring me something nice (sic) what you think best,” she asked. “P.S. Please do not forget the poor.”
The letter never made it to Santa; it was discovered 90 years later stashed in between the bricks of the tenement’s fireplace. But that same year, the New York City branch of the USPS informally implemented “Operation Santa,” an unusually whimsical government program that allowed Postal Service employees (and volunteers with the “Santa Claus Association”) to respond, as Santa, to the thousands of New York children attempting to contact St. Nick. Postmaster Frank Hitchcock would integrate the program in 1912 to include the entirety of the Post Office, making “Operation Santa” an official government program. After 1940, the program allowed charitable organizations, private firms, and laypeople to “adopt” the letters of kids living in poverty and fulfill their Christmas wishes. The film Miracle on 34th Street references the endeavor, and Johnny Carson made a habit of reading some of the letters on The Tonight Show. The program has grown to the point where it connected 13,000 children to donors, a total that may well be doubled in 2020. This year, the letters have been digitized, and if you’re interested in adopting a letter, you can go to the Operation Santa website and browse through the hopes and desires of thousands of children across the country.


newrepublic--2020-12-25--Joe Biden Doesn’t Need the GOP’s Permission to Fix Our Broken Immigration System

When you consider that no small amount of research is necessary to do something as simple as properly contest a parking ticket , it ’ s easier to imagine how difficult it is to navigate the immigration legal framework ’ s thousands of hyper-technical and often contradictory stipulations , all of which would be written in a language foreign to you—to say nothing of doing so while in ICE detention .
Then imagine presenting your case alone before an executive branch judge , all while a trained executive branch attorney who might already be on the fourth such case of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
To state the obvious , it ’ s not a system particularly conducive to fairness , or even efficiency .
A restructuring of priorities could open up resources for a sort of federal public-private partnership to foment universal legal representation instead of leaving it up to localities .
The constant lawsuits against new Trump policies have also strained the operations of many immigration-focused legal providers ; Biden simply dropping its defense of various asylum restrictions , for example , could free up a lot of legal firepower .
Beyond the courts , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ areas being pushed by advocates would clear a path for hundreds of thousands of people who could be technically eligible to legalize their status but are currently prevented from doing so due to convoluted rules , which both force them to leave the country to apply and bar them from reentering .
As part of a Clinton-era immigration overhaul , unlawful presence in the country—the time since a visa has expired or , for people who entered illegally , since they set foot on U.S. soil—often triggers bans on reentry upon departure .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ present without status for more than 180 days are banned for three years ; for those who hit a year of unlawful presence , the penalty is ten years .
At the same time , most people without status can not apply to get it from inside the country , even if they otherwise have a legal avenue of which they might take advantage .
The bizarre result is a cadre of immigrants with a legal path to residency but for whom the act of actually seeking it risks years of exile .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be waived for people who can prove their ban would cause hardship to U.S. citizen spouses or parents but not children , thus excluding hundreds of thousands of undocumented parents .
One solution would be to expand the parole-in-place ( PIP ) program , a loophole currently available only to families of military service members under which certain officials are permitted to parole people who don ’ t otherwise have status into the country on humanitarian grounds .
This process can technically occur even when the beneficiary is already in the country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ entry for the purposes of adjusting status .
Minnesota immigration lawyer and National Guardsman David Kubat told The New Republic that even for people with no immediate path to legal status , parole can provide work authorization and make status easier to achieve in the future .
“ Once you ’ re paroled , you ’ re always paroled for the purposes of adjustment , ” he said .
“ It would permanently put several million people on a path to adjustment of status , which can put a real dent in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was lent Congressional support in last year ’ s National Defense Authorization Act , giving broad presidential use a much better legal footing , and could be paired with pure deferral programs similar to DACA .

The entire system can also benefit from better access to legal representation. Unlike their counterparts in the criminal justice system, immigrants in removal proceedings are not guaranteed an attorney if they can’t afford one. It’s hard to arrive at any accurate estimate of how many people, including children, end up appearing in court alone, but an American Immigration Council report surveying data from 2007 to 2012 found that only 32 percent of those caught up in these proceedings did so with the assistance of legal counsel. A number of municipalities, including New York City, have instituted their own public defender-style programs for immigrants with deportation cases, but the staggering number of new cases in the last several years has likely overwhelmed these efforts.
When you consider that no small amount of research is necessary to do something as simple as properly contest a parking ticket, it’s easier to imagine how difficult it is to navigate the immigration legal framework’s thousands of hyper-technical and often contradictory stipulations, all of which would be written in a language foreign to you—to say nothing of doing so while in ICE detention. Then imagine presenting your case alone before an executive branch judge, all while a trained executive branch attorney who might already be on the fourth such case of the day tries to shoot you down. To state the obvious, it’s not a system particularly conducive to fairness, or even efficiency. A restructuring of priorities could open up resources for a sort of federal public-private partnership to foment universal legal representation instead of leaving it up to localities. The constant lawsuits against new Trump policies have also strained the operations of many immigration-focused legal providers; Biden simply dropping its defense of various asylum restrictions, for example, could free up a lot of legal firepower.
Beyond the courts, one of the most significant executive action areas being pushed by advocates would clear a path for hundreds of thousands of people who could be technically eligible to legalize their status but are currently prevented from doing so due to convoluted rules, which both force them to leave the country to apply and bar them from reentering. As part of a Clinton-era immigration overhaul, unlawful presence in the country—the time since a visa has expired or, for people who entered illegally, since they set foot on U.S. soil—often triggers bans on reentry upon departure. Generally speaking, people who have been present without status for more than 180 days are banned for three years; for those who hit a year of unlawful presence, the penalty is ten years. At the same time, most people without status cannot apply to get it from inside the country, even if they otherwise have a legal avenue of which they might take advantage.


newrepublic--2020-12-25--This Beleaguered Federal Agency Is America’s Best Hope to Curb Guns

The ATF is a federal law enforcement agency that focuses on gun crimes .
It also inspects gun dealers and manufacturers to make sure they follow the law .
Despite this incredibly important mission , the ATF flies under the radar .
To start , its full name—the Bureau of Alcohol , Tobacco , Firearms and Explosives—sounds more like a wild Saturday night than a law enforcement agency .
It ’ s also overshadowed by its bigger cousins at the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Drug Enforcement Agency .
The ATF has also been a lightning rod for controversy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a 1993 standoff at a religious compound in Waco , Texas , where a group calling themselves the Branch Davidians were stockpiling guns , which ended in the deaths of four ATF agents and over 60 church members .
Most recently , the bureau came under fire for an Obama-era operation where agents allowed illegal gun purchases to proceed in an effort to uncover gun trafficking networks along the Arizona-Mexico border .
Its name , Fast and Furious , became a byword for scandal after one of the guns turned up at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Border Patrol agent .
Underneath those dramatic headlines are budget and leadership problems that have plagued the agency for years .
Almost everyone agrees that the ATF is in trouble .
But this obscure federal agency may be President-elect Joe Biden ’ s best chance at having a real impact on gun policy—if he takes the opportunity to restore the beleaguered agency ’ s reputation and revive its mission .
In fact , experts told The New Republic that the ATF may be Biden ’ s best bet at leaving a mark on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on an intransigent Congress .
All agreed that the bureau has faced significant problems over the years , but they outlined a series of proposals they said Biden could push to breathe new life into the bureau and address gun violence .

The ATF is a federal law enforcement agency that focuses on gun crimes. It also inspects gun dealers and manufacturers to make sure they follow the law. Despite this incredibly important mission, the ATF flies under the radar. To start, its full name—the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives—sounds more like a wild Saturday night than a law enforcement agency. It’s also overshadowed by its bigger cousins at the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Drug Enforcement Agency.
The ATF has also been a lightning rod for controversy. It famously entered the zeitgeist with a 1993 standoff at a religious compound in Waco, Texas, where a group calling themselves the Branch Davidians were stockpiling guns, which ended in the deaths of four ATF agents and over 60 church members. Most recently, the bureau came under fire for an Obama-era operation where agents allowed illegal gun purchases to proceed in an effort to uncover gun trafficking networks along the Arizona-Mexico border. Its name, Fast and Furious, became a byword for scandal after one of the guns turned up at the scene of the murder of a U.S. Border Patrol agent. Underneath those dramatic headlines are budget and leadership problems that have plagued the agency for years.
Almost everyone agrees that the ATF is in trouble. But this obscure federal agency may be President-elect Joe Biden’s best chance at having a real impact on gun policy—if he takes the opportunity to restore the beleaguered agency’s reputation and revive its mission. In fact, experts told The New Republic that the ATF may be Biden’s best bet at leaving a mark on federal gun policy without having to rely on an intransigent Congress. All agreed that the bureau has faced significant problems over the years, but they outlined a series of proposals they said Biden could push to breathe new life into the bureau and address gun violence.


newrepublic--2020-12-28--The Urgent Case for Shrinking the Economy

Most people encounter the growth debate , if they encounter it at all , through the idea of “ green growth.
” This is a vision for our collective future based on the belief that technological advance will drastically reduce the amount of raw materials needed to sustain growth—a process known as dematerialization—and “ decouple ” growing GDP from its ecological impacts .
As proof that this is not only possible but already happening , boosters of the idea point to the transition by rich countries from manufacturing to service-based economies , as well as efficiency gains in energy and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ process that replaced letters with email , and compact discs with digital files , will continue until we live in a spectral economy where little at all is manufactured or transported , save those things that can be pulled from thin air by , one presumes , solar-powered 3-D printers .
The belief that green growth will save us , also known as “ ecomodernism ” or “ ecopragmatism , ” has become a trendy article of faith among elites who acknowledge climate change and the dangers of breaching ecological boundaries .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ behind the idea in an article for Science magazine , maintaining that signs of decoupling in major economies “ should put to rest the argument that combatting climate change requires accepting lower growth or a lower standard of living.
” The argument that capitalism can grow itself out of the present crisis may be soothing to those who like the world as it is .
It also relies on the kind of accounting tricks and rejection of reality more closely associated with Obama ’ s successor .
As Hickel points out , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emissions released within national borders , and not those further upstream in the global production chains .
By only counting the emissions created within a country that imports most of its cars , washing machines , and computers , you end up pushing the emissions related to their production off the books .
When you factor them back in , the picture is much less green .
A number of recent studies show no evidence of meaningful decoupling—in energy or materials—even as the world increases its use of renewable energy and finds ways @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The problem , Hickel argues , is explained by the “ paradox ” first observed by the nineteenth-century economist William Stanley Jevons : In a growth system , gains in efficiency do not translate to higher wages , greater equality , more leisure , or lower emissions ; they are plowed right back into the growth cycle .
A classic example of this dynamic is the advent of the chain saw .
A person with a chain saw can cut 10 times as many trees in the same time as a person using @ @ @ @ @ @ @ use this invention , however , to shorten the workweek by 90 percent .
They used it to cut 10 times more trees than they otherwise would have .
“ Lashed by the growth imperative , technology is used not to do the same amount of stuff in less time , but rather to do more stuff in the same amount of time , ” Hickel writes .
“ In a system where technological innovation is leveraged to expand extraction and production , it makes little sense to hope that yet more technological @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
”

Green growth, Hickel concludes, is an ecologically incoherent “fairy tale.” If this seems harsh, consider what the ecomodernist position asks us to believe. The current system requires annual growth of roughly 3 percent to avoid the shock of recession. This means doubling the size of the economy every 23 years. The economy of 2000 must be 20 times larger in the year 2100, and 370 times larger in the year 2200. The green growth position rests on the assumption that this can go on, basically forever, because innovation will “dematerialize” the economy. Yet 2000 was the first year that, according to experts, humanity used more energy and materials than the safe limit. And the growth economy, far from dematerializing, remains geared toward expanding future markets for extremely materials-heavy products like Tesla cybertrucks and Apple iPhones. Comparing this to a fairy tale is, if anything, too generous, since children’s stories usually involve some kind of moral lesson applicable to the real world.
The economy that Hickel envisions would cease to pursue growth, green or otherwise. Materials and energy will still be consumed, and waste generated, but at much lower levels. All impacts on the natural world will be tethered to the question, “Growth for whom, and to what ends?” In place of an individualistic consumer economy, Hickel’s post-growth economy would direct itself toward the creation of public goods that allow the many to live well—mass transit, health care—rather than to keep a few in luxury. In a word that never appears in the book: ecosocialism. Hickel is less interested in the macroeconomic details of this future than are growth critics based in economics departments, like Tim Jackson and Kate Raworth, and more focused on the leisure, security, and general human flourishing that he believes will follow from unshackling the economy from the growth imperative. That this will happen, Hickel has no doubts, and he makes an alluring case that degrowth does not require anything like the “command-and-control fiasco of the Soviet Union, or some back-to-the-caves, hair-shirted disaster of voluntary impoverishment.”
Ecomodernists huff loudly at claims that any kind of economic downshift—planned or unplanned—can result in anything but a drastic deterioration in human welfare. The evidence may suggest they are wrong. A growing body of research reveals an inverse relationship between “happiness” and growth beyond a certain point. In the rich countries, general contentment peaked in 1950, when GDP and real per capita incomes were fractions of their present size (and inequality near modern historic lows); degrowthers posit that similar happiness levels will be reclaimed on the way back down the economic mountain. Hickel describes a post-growth economy defined by stability and equality, and the freedom and leisure possible when the economy is no longer subservient to the god of growth. He estimates that the U.S. economy could be scaled down by as much as 65 percent while still improving the lives of its citizens. This includes the metric most often tied to celebrations of endless growth: life expectancy.


newrepublic--2020-12-28--Buy Every American an Electric Moped

Buy Every American an Electric Moped

That may still sound silly , but an electric scooter subsidy could easily be modeled on California ’ s electric vehicle subsidy .
Such a subsidy would actually be much more effective in tackling climate change , too , by actually changing the transportation habits—and maybe even other lifestyle decisions , down the line—of Americans .
And for the working poor , many of whom live in places where car ownership is mandatory to find and keep work , it would amount to a revolution in mobility .
For years , the California Clean Electric Vehicle Rebate Program has helped @ @ @ @ @ @ @ electric ( and hybrid and hydrogen fuel-cell ) cars .
It turned out to be so popular that they were forced to reduce the size of the rebates and restrict who could receive them .
Prior to that restriction , it amounted to a large subsidy for upper-middle-class and rich Californians to buy luxury cars–luxury cars that spew fewer greenhouse gasses than normal cars , to be sure , but not remotely carbon-neutral ones .
Researchers have spent the last few years debating the total carbon impact of battery-electric automobiles .
Are they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ engines ?
The answer , it seems , is yes , but not as much as we need , and it depends on where you drive these cars .
One major study from earlier this year determined electric cars to be “ better for the climate than conventional petrol cars in 95 % of the world.
” But the differences in how much less they emit than gas-powered cars over their entire lifespans can vary greatly by region , from as much as 70 percent less in Sweden and France , to only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As Professor Greg Marsden , from Leeds University ’ s Institute for Transport Studies told the BBC , “ Electrification is necessary but not enough.
” Instead , “ We need a major shift away from the car if we are to meet our climate goals .
Carbon emissions are not even the only thing to worry about with electric automobiles .

A nation of electric moped-owners would not just change their own behavior; they’d become a constituency for changing all of our transportation options and our built environment itself. Most people don’t need massive vehicles for the majority of their travel. Throughout the rest of the world, most people manage to get by with lighter and smaller vehicles than the ones Americans use. Many Americans are purchasing larger and larger SUVs and trucks because they feel safer, but the main thing they feel safer from is other people in larger and larger SUVs and trucks. Low-speed, light-weight scooters will pose much less of a threat to children and pedestrians, and if their use is widespread, their users should come to realize the benefits of further restricting the use of heavy automobiles in urban and even suburban settings.
Rich people don’t need subsidies to buy nice things.
Ideally, once millions of adult Americans are tooling around on their Biden Scooters, it may even help bring about much needed changes in development patterns and land use as people seek out new places to live and work, where using scooters feels safer and more convenient, or make the places where they currently live and work more conducive to small vehicles.
Now, it turns out that the federal government, recognizing the wisdom of my plan, already subsidizes the purchase of “electric motorcycles,” offering a federal tax credit up to $2,500 in value for their purchase. That’s nearly enough to cover that nice European scooter I linked earlier, right? Wrong: The tax credit is only for 10 percent of the cost of the bike up to that amount, meaning, much like California’s electric vehicle subsidies, it is just a coupon for rich people to buy nice things. (The subsidy is also set to expire at the end of this year.)


newrepublic--2020-12-28--The Year When Everyone Bullied Their Mayor

“ People ’ s City Council formed out of the frustration that you had a city council and you had a city in lockdown facing extraordinary circumstances and a total breakdown—everything shut down—and it left a lot of people high and dry , ” Trinidad Ruiz , an organizer with People ’ s City Council , told me .
“ The half-measures that they would put forward to pretend like there were solutions really began to anger people .
Nobody was working , everybody was at home , and you ’ re watching this farce play out and these elected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ While the coalition takes aim at a number of elected officials , including the city councilmember it helped oust last November , it specializes in unabashedly trolling the mayor , with memes that incorporate pop culture and local landmarks .
“ Fuck Garcetti ” has become a popular chant at protests , and the group has turned it into a slogan on t-shirts and stickers .
The url fuckgarcetti.com links to a list of stats that are anything but flattering .
In Minneapolis , it was the city councilmembers , not the mayor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and pledged to dismantle the city ’ s police force in the wake of George Floyd ’ s murder .
While that pledge has since turned into a much more modest diversion of funds , Mayor Jacob Frey has done little to repair community relations with police—or trust in city government .
When he told a crowd of protesters that marched to his house last summer that he didn ’ t support the abolition of the city ’ s police department , he was met with shouts of “ Shame !
Shame !
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” The critique has continued online , where his recent tweet about receiving an award from the local Urban League was met with a steady stream of reaction gifs expressing an utter disconnect from reality .
“ Jacob have you considered actually talking to your constituents ?
” one asked .
In Portland , another solidly blue city , residents actually have something in common with President Trump : an affinity for dunking on Mayor Ted Wheeler—albeit for very different reasons .
In late August , following months of protests , Trump admonished @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a “ fool ” for not bringing in the National Guard to tame them .
But Trump had in fact already called in federal agents who , just a month earlier , ended up tear gassing Wheeler himself during his attempt to make peace between police and protesters .
The tactic didn ’ t work ; protesters chanted “ Fuck Ted Wheeler ” and called for him to resign after failing to remove federal officers from the city .
Unsurprisingly , the replies to his tweets—the tone and content of which are nearly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s—are filled with memes and gifs that respond to his seemingly empty government rhetoric .

In Minneapolis, it was the city councilmembers, not the mayor, who heeded the calls of activists and pledged to dismantle the city’s police force in the wake of George Floyd’s murder. While that pledge has since turned into a much more modest diversion of funds, Mayor Jacob Frey has done little to repair community relations with police—or trust in city government. When he told a crowd of protesters that marched to his house last summer that he didn’t support the abolition of the city’s police department, he was met with shouts of “Shame! Shame!” and “Go home Jacob!” The critique has continued online, where his recent tweet about receiving an award from the local Urban League was met with a steady stream of reaction gifs expressing an utter disconnect from reality. “Jacob have you considered actually talking to your constituents?” one asked.
In Portland, another solidly blue city, residents actually have something in common with President Trump: an affinity for dunking on Mayor Ted Wheeler—albeit for very different reasons. In late August, following months of protests, Trump admonished the mayor on Twitter, calling him a “fool” for not bringing in the National Guard to tame them. But Trump had in fact already called in federal agents who, just a month earlier, ended up tear gassing Wheeler himself during his attempt to make peace between police and protesters. The tactic didn’t work; protesters chanted “Fuck Ted Wheeler” and called for him to resign after failing to remove federal officers from the city. Unsurprisingly, the replies to his tweets—the tone and content of which are nearly interchangeable with Garcetti’s or Frey’s—are filled with memes and gifs that respond to his seemingly empty government rhetoric.
The collective rage directed this year at the likes of Garcetti and his New York counterpart, de Blasio, stemmed at least in part from their aspirations to ascend the very office to which voters elected them. In 2017, the year he was reelected, Garcetti spent nearly a third of his time traveling outside of California, The Los Angeles Times reported; his frequent trips to swing states boosted speculation that he was planning to run for president in 2020. He ultimately scrapped the idea of running, but the damage had already been done. By that point, community activists had begun circulating mock “missing” signs to draw attention to the time Garcetti had spent away from his office amid a ballooning homelessness and housing crisis.


newrepublic--2020-12-28--The Case for Biden to Muddle Through America’s Political Crisis

Biden has his own answer to that question : As he has often said in the past , while you can always question the judgment of your political rivals , you should never question their motives .
That makes sense in a legislative setting when you are groping toward a deal .
But when it comes to the Trump supporters who encouraged or ignored affronts to democracy during the past four years , motivations become all-important—as a way of classifying people and dealing with them in the future .
Trump ’ s Republican enablers fit into roughly three camps .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Great Leader with such zeal that they are willing , even eager , to abandon truth and logic in obedience to the latest Trump tweet .
Another sizable group—heavily represented in politics and among Fox News hosts—are the cynics who ignore Trump ’ s excesses because the last four years have been so good for them personally .
The third category , and probably the largest , is made up of the cowards , who might disagree with the president in private but who quake and shake in fear that crossing him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contracts , and friendships in the locker rooms of their country clubs .
Some of the true believers—at least those who have not spent the last four years spewing racism and hatred—deserve a certain degree of pity because they were victims of a con man .
They are the ignorant and the gullible who , in a different context , might have greedily sent their banking information to a Nigerian email address .
Often , victims of scams initially refuse to believe that they have been taken in .
The best strategy is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of reality ( “ Sorry , but the families of deposed African despots don ’ t want to send you money ” ) in the hopes that eventually their delusions will fade .
Cynics present a trickier problem .
For the TV hosts obsessed with ratings ( I see you waving your hand , Tucker Carlson ) , the expectation is that new controversies ( maybe “ The War on Arbor Day ” ) will eventually provide richer fodder than Trump ’ s lies .
Some cynics such as Mitch McConnell will , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ corridors of power in the Senate .
Biden ’ s only strategy in dealing with them is to highlight situations in which their political self-interest lies in moving away from Trump .
To some degree , Biden is already following this strategy as when he said in a pre-Christmas press conference , “ I ’ m not going to villainize the opposition , but I am going to stand and say , ‘ This is what we got to do .
’ ”

Some of the true believers—at least those who have not spent the last four years spewing racism and hatred—deserve a certain degree of pity because they were victims of a con man. They are the ignorant and the gullible who, in a different context, might have greedily sent their banking information to a Nigerian email address. Often, victims of scams initially refuse to believe that they have been taken in. The best strategy is to reintroduce them patiently to the world of reality (“Sorry, but the families of deposed African despots don’t want to send you money”) in the hopes that eventually their delusions will fade.
Cynics present a trickier problem. For the TV hosts obsessed with ratings (I see you waving your hand, Tucker Carlson), the expectation is that new controversies (maybe “The War on Arbor Day”) will eventually provide richer fodder than Trump’s lies. Some cynics such as Mitch McConnell will, alas, continue to creep along the corridors of power in the Senate. Biden’s only strategy in dealing with them is to highlight situations in which their political self-interest lies in moving away from Trump. To some degree, Biden is already following this strategy as when he said in a pre-Christmas press conference, “I’m not going to villainize the opposition, but I am going to stand and say, ‘This is what we got to do.’”
The easiest group to deal with are the cowards because they knew the right thing to do all along—they just lacked the gumption to act on their instincts. The hope is that these Republicans will rediscover their moral compass with Trump out of the White House. It is telling that Nebraska Republican Senator Ben Sasse became far more outspoken in his attacks on Trumpism after he won reelection in November, telling a Nebraska newspaper, “The Republican Party should be talking a lot more like Ronald Reagan than like QAnon.”


newrepublic--2020-12-28--Can Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock Make History?

Browne told me , “ The reality is , I ’ m not surprised he ’ s doing this , ” meaning , running for Senate .
“ The line from then to now is right there.
” While Warnock was in high school , he attended Upward Bound programs in the summer at Savannah State , a federally funded program that prepares children from low-income families for college .
“ That ’ s where he began to take shape , ” said Otis Johnson , who spoke to Upward Bound students during those years and educated teenagers about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time , Johnson also hosted a local radio program called “ Message from the Grass Roots , ” where activists and others talked about economic and social justice .
For Warnock , Johnson represented “ intellect and integrity , all committed to pulling folk up from the grassroots , ” as he told a group of Savannah leaders As teenagers in Savannah , Pastor Rouché recalls , “ The mindset of most people was , get out of here , at least to Atlanta , which was more progressive and where there were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an undergraduate degree from Morehouse College , Warnock pursued postgraduate work at Union Theological Seminary in New York and eventually became assistant pastor at Harlem ’ s Abyssinian Baptist Church—a post once held by Adam Clayton Powell , Jr. , who went on to become the first Black member of Congress from New York .
In 2005 , Warnock was named as the fifth—and youngest—senior pastor in the 134-year history of Atlanta ’ s Ebenezer Baptist Church , where Martin Luther King , Jr. had also preached .
“ It was like every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Rouché said .
“ It was like , he ’ s making his mark.
” Once back in Georgia , Warnock would return to Savannah and preach as a guest at the church of one of his sisters , Reverend Joyce Hall .
“ The thing that was eye-opening , was to see him talk about the struggle , ” Rouché said .
“ That Jesus was for people in the struggle .
His ministry was there for the disenfranchised.
” Warnock recommended a book to Rouché : The God of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Deemed by some to be “ the father of Black theology , ” Cone ’ s central message is that liberation from oppression is the true message of the cross .
Warnock , said Otis Johnson , “ comes out of the school of Black theology .
That ’ s why I enjoy his sermons.
” The Ebenezer Baptist minister speaks to him as “ a Matthew 25 Christian , ” he added , referring to the notion of caring for those who are hungry , thirsty , sick , or in prison @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Senate .
”

Twenty Black religious leaders met in Savannah with General William T. Sherman in 1865 and suggested that one response to the injustice of slavery would be to grant tens of thousands of freedmen and women their own land. Days later, this idea was memorialized in Sherman’s Field Order No. 15, which granted around 400,000 acres in lots of up to 40 acres each. When Lincoln was assassinated, the government backed out of the arrangement, bringing to an abrupt end the nation’s most significant step toward reparations to date. Savannah-area elders see Warnock as part of this history and not just the son of two preachers who has become a prominent minister. “He’s caught up in a legacy,” said Otis Johnson, who became Savannah’s second Black mayor in 2004.” It’s almost like it’s his destiny.”
Savannah-area elders see Warnock as part of Georgia’s history.
Ossoff, too, is bound by legacy in a state where the Ku Klux Klan took aim at Blacks, Jews, and Catholics. In stump speeches and interviews, Ossoff has taken to referring to “the fact that a young Jewish son of immigrants is running alongside a Black preacher from Ebenezer Baptist Church” as a sign that Georgia has changed. “Both are representing the New South,” said Representative Hank Johnson, who was Ossoff’s boss and one of his mentors in Georgia politics, along with the late civil rights icon John Lewis. “It’s very symbolic. It’s providential. I think Georgia and Georgians have changed quite a lot. There are people with old South ideas—but they’re fewer and fewer.”
If Warnock and Ossoff are to repeat Biden’s surprise victory in Georgia—a first for a Democratic presidential candidate since Bill Clinton’s narrow win in 1992—they’ll have to hope that Congressman Johnson is right.


newrepublic--2020-12-28--Has an American President Ever Been Worse at Politics?

Unless he overthrows the republic in the next 23 days , President Trump carried out his last two major official acts over the past week .
There will probably be a last-minute fusillade of pardons for friends , family members , allies , and perhaps even himself .
His subordinates will rush through federal regulatory changes and try to entrench other policy changes .
Maybe he will even sign an executive order or two .
But in the broad strokes of governance , Trump ’ s presidency is effectively over .
The first of those two acts was Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Act ( NDAA ) on Wednesday , which will almost certainly be overridden by Congress in the next few days .
The second , which came on Sunday evening , was his belated decision to sign the omnibus stimulus bill passed by Congress last Monday .
His approval came five days after a last-minute veto threat unless lawmakers upped the direct payments to Americans from $ 600 to $ 2,000 and removed “ wasteful and unnecessary items ” ; his gambit failed .
It ’ s the perfect coda to a presidency that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Trump ’ s self-destructive approach to legislative relations .
He may well go down in history as the worst politician ever to occupy the White House .
Consider what exactly led him to veto the NDAA , the annual budget-ish bill that funds the military .
In the months before the House and Senate passed the bill by veto-proof margins , Trump repeatedly cited two sticking points in tweets and public remarks .
One of them was a legislative effort to rename U.S. military bases named after Confederate generals , including Forts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hill .
The measure drew bipartisan support for a very simple reason : It makes no sense to name American military installations after traitors who fought and killed American soldiers on behalf of a slaver aristocracy .

Right-wing conversations about Section 230 are often detached from the reality of what the provision actually does. For all the fretting about cancel culture and online censorship by Silicon Valley in conservative circles, Section 230 is only loosely connected to their fears. (Ironically, scrapping the provision could make Big Tech even more censorious to avoid litigation.) All of this matters little to Trump, who offsets his lack of policy knowledge and lack of intellectual curiosity with sheer bravado. He blames Silicon Valley giants like Facebook and Google for all manner of political problems, and he relishes the idea of punishing them in some way. Even among GOP lawmakers who share those views, however, it’s not worth holding up paychecks for soldiers.
Trump spent most of his adult life building a public image as a master dealmaker. In reality, he brought himself and the Trump Organization to the brink of financial ruin throughout the 1990s. But he managed to parlay that image into a popular reality TV show, which stabilized his family business in the 2000s and then into a successful presidential run. His presidency exposed how his much vaunted dealmaking skills amounted to little more than hostage-taking. He makes threats from positions of weakness and declines to capitalize on advantages. He reneges on deals struck with friends and foes alike, leading Congress and his own Cabinet to largely bypass him for budgetary negotiations. He prioritizes symbolic stands over substantive accomplishments. And he dwells on personal problems like his impending loss of power over the common good.
The irony here is that Trump wouldn’t need to worry about clinging onto power so much if he’d exercised just a smidge more self-control before the election. The Cares Act, which sent a $1,200 check to most Americans earlier this year and boosted state unemployment insurance programs, may have been one of the most successful relief measures in the history of the republic. Economic hardship is hard to reduce to a single statistic, of course, but it’s worth noting that the nation’s poverty rate actually fell in April and May thanks to the Cares Act even as the American economy partially collapsed. Those relief measures, combined with geographic disparities and hyper-polarization, likely prevented a Biden landslide in the November elections.


newrepublic--2020-12-28--France Is Flooding Africa With Fake News

On May 5 , 2017 , the French political scene was upended by what became known as , a cache of more than 21,000 emails hacked from Emmanuel Macron ’ s political associates .
It was two days before the final round of voting in the presidential election and just hours before a legally mandated election-news blackout was set to begin : prime time to try to spread rumor and scandal on French social media .
Attributed to Russian hackers , who used bots to promote the material on Twitter , Facebook , and 4chan , the leak was seized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Le Pen .
The leak , which helped spread unsubstantiated rumors of financial impropriety by Macron , didn ’ t help Le Pen close her substantial gap with Macron , but it became an important event in the fight over online disinformation .
After winning the presidency , Macron promised a regulatory crackdown , that allowed judges to order the removal of “ fake news ” during elections .
But France , at that time , was also busy pushing disinformation of its own—albeit in another continent .
When Macron was elected , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a wide-reaching military campaign to rid Mali and other countries in Africa ’ s Sahel region of jihadists loyal to the Islamic State , Al Qaeda , and other terrorist groups .
Like any counterinsurgency campaign , dealing with propaganda and disinformation are core parts of Barkhane .
But in this case , the producer of fake news appears to be members of the French military , who , according to , are flooding francophone African Facebook pages , especially in Mali and the Central African Republic , with disinformation designed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Operation Barkhane .
While it ’ s difficult to judge the relative success of the operation , the news has worried African politicians : that disinformation had been “ destabilizing the country , ” which has experienced election-related violence , including the killing of United Nations peacekeepers .
While has suggested that western governments conduct online influence campaigns—with fake accounts , disinformation , and other trappings of digital propaganda—rarely have they been caught in the wild .
Instead , journalists—and western governments—have tended to focus on the threat of Russia ’ s digital @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reveals that governments like France are potentially just as complicit in online influence campaigns , particularly when their perceived interests are challenged .
Rather than being hapless victims of Russian digital aggression , countries like France seem to be learning how to master their own information operations—and applying those lessons to political conflicts overseas .

Following Facebook’s example, the Graphika report avoids attributing the operation to the French government or military, especially regarding “institutional involvement”; instead, Graphika says that the operation is “linked to individuals with ties to the French military.” But in a statement to the regional news site Sahelien, the French defense ministry didn’t deny that the campaign had French military links. “We are not surprised by the Graphika study’s conclusions,” it said. “We are studying them and at this stage cannot attribute possible responsibilities.”
From Vietnam to North Africa, France has long seen propaganda and psychological operations as essential to counterinsurgency operations. In Algeria, for instance, France conducted “poison pen” operations, spreading rumors of false betrayals that caused rebel leaders to turn against one another. “According to longstanding French doctrine, there’s this understanding that things like shaping opinion are actually more important than killing anybody on the battlefield,” said Michael Shurkin, a senior analyst at RAND who has written about the history of French counterinsurgency policy. That’s why, Shurkin noted, official French military social media accounts often portray soldiers digging wells, doing development work and other efforts to win hearts and minds. That’s the bulk of their public outreach. But there’s another side, too. “The temptation is going to be there to start dabbling in more clandestine kinds of operations,” said Shurkin, referring to online influence campaigns.


newrepublic--2020-12-29--Ron DeSantis Is TNR’s 2020 Scoundrel of the Year

In June , after cases tripled , DeSantis announced , “ No , we ’ re not shutting down , you know , we ’ re going to go forward.
” He called for schools to be open in the fall and blamed the increase in cases on the increase in testing .
He transitioned from attributing Florida ’ s Covid-19 bloom to people from New York in March , saying that “ tens of thousands have defied [ state directives in New York ] and so we ’ re ending up in a situation where we ’ re having @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” to blaming migrant workers and a watermelon farm in June .
As ever , responsibility fell on nameless New York liberals , rootless cosmopolitans of variegated pigments , nameless Florida migrants , and not , even for a second , the Republican in charge .
What didn ’ t get blamed was the one thing that DeSantis ’ s actions suggested was his goal all along : herd immunity .
While it wasn ’ t until December that Americans knew that a chief deputy to Trump ’ s Covid-19 mouthpiece Michael Caputo @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Floridians could watch DeSantis quietly try to move the goalposts .
While April ’ s eruption of cases and deaths were New York ’ s fault , he mocked the early coronavirus “ hysteria , ” then emphasized that “ Florida is Ground Zero for nursing homes , we ’ re God ’ s waiting room ” and that the people dying were “ folks 65 and up.
” Meanwhile , he lied , “ This particular pandemic is one where , I don ’ t think nationwide there ’ s been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whatever reason it just doesn ’ t seem to threaten , you know , kids.… If you ’ re younger it just hasn ’ t had an impact .
So that should factor into how we ’ re viewing this.
” It should .
While DeSantis deserves credit for putting visitation restrictions on nursing homes , he managed to shift focus and blame in a manner consonant with , at the very least , letting a vast intervention of Nothing float the state toward herd immunity by default .
He ended Florida ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Easter numbers were surging .
By mid-summer , villainy had shifted to a testing regime that stubbornly kept finding the virus , and DeSantis had no way of accounting for the state ’ s uncontrolled spread , save to explain that it didn ’ t actually matter : Higher positivity , more number of tests—probably the most significant change we ’ ve seen is a radical change in the median age of people who are testing positive .
The median age was in their 60s .
In the last two to three @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dramatic decline .
Now it consistently is 33 , 34 , 35 .
You ’ re talking about a lot of people in their thirties .
Those groups , by and large , are much less at risk for really serious consequences .
In the state of Florida , 86 percent of all the fatalities have been over the age of 86 .
How providential that the cohort least likely to die of Covid-19 was infecting itself in a way that could eventually serve to herd-immunize the elderly and vulnerable in a world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of youthful exuberance , because you can not control American adults under 44 .
The right people were getting infected less , and the cannon fodder was leaping out of the trenches .
What was anyone gon na do ?
Stop this crazy thing ?

What didn’t get blamed was the one thing that DeSantis’s actions suggested was his goal all along: herd immunity. While it wasn’t until December that Americans knew that a chief deputy to Trump’s Covid-19 mouthpiece Michael Caputo was aggressively pursuing a herd immunity strategy, Floridians could watch DeSantis quietly try to move the goalposts. While April’s eruption of cases and deaths were New York’s fault, he mocked the early coronavirus “hysteria,” then emphasized that “Florida is Ground Zero for nursing homes, we’re God’s waiting room” and that the people dying were “folks 65 and up.” Meanwhile, he lied, “This particular pandemic is one where, I don’t think nationwide there’s been a single fatality under 25. For whatever reason it just doesn’t seem to threaten, you know, kids.… If you’re younger it just hasn’t had an impact. So that should factor into how we’re viewing this.”
It should. While DeSantis deserves credit for putting visitation restrictions on nursing homes, he managed to shift focus and blame in a manner consonant with, at the very least, letting a vast intervention of Nothing float the state toward herd immunity by default. He ended Florida’s April flirtation with safety just as the Easter numbers were surging. By mid-summer, villainy had shifted to a testing regime that stubbornly kept finding the virus, and DeSantis had no way of accounting for the state’s uncontrolled spread, save to explain that it didn’t actually matter:
Higher positivity, more number of tests—probably the most significant change we’ve seen is a radical change in the median age of people who are testing positive. The median age was in their 60s. In the last two to three weeks, you’ve seen a dramatic decline. Now it consistently is 33, 34, 35. You’re talking about a lot of people in their thirties. Those groups, by and large, are much less at risk for really serious consequences. In the state of Florida, 86 percent of all the fatalities have been over the age of 86.
How providential that the cohort least likely to die of Covid-19 was infecting itself in a way that could eventually serve to herd-immunize the elderly and vulnerable in a world where government stood powerless in the face of youthful exuberance, because you cannot control American adults under 44. The right people were getting infected less, and the cannon fodder was leaping out of the trenches. What was anyone gonna do? Stop this crazy thing?


newrepublic--2020-12-29--How to Make the Paris Agreement Really Work

Governments whose national budgets rely on oil revenues aren ’ t going to be too keen to excise fossil fuels from the global economy .
Those that have been on the losing end of brutal debt repayment schemes imposed by the International Monetary Fund and World Bank—the so-called Bretton Woods system the U.S. helped erect—will be rightfully skeptical of being told to cut back on fossil fueled development that ’ s still often the only viable path toward raising living standards .
In both Democratic and Republican administrations , U.S. negotiators ’ approach has been to demand massive reductions from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like China and India—with little to show at home .
Before Donald Trump withdrew the U.S. from Paris , the Obama administration had pledged to reduce emissions by between just 26 and 28 percent by 2025 to meet that goal .
Within the UNFCCC , the U.S. has consistently fought off agreements that include binding emissions targets and was instrumental in bringing about the voluntary framework that defines the Paris Agreement .
But without more concerted discussions about climate finance—an umbrella term for how to transfer funds mainly from developed to developing nations—rapid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , developing economies .
U.S. negotiators have consistently blocked discussions of historical responsibility in favor of arbitrary financing pledges that can be satisfied by loading already indebted countries up with more debt .
Meeting the climate challenge , of course , depends on other nations , too : Climate change is a global problem , and the U.S. now contributes roughly 15 percent of carbon emissions , the second most of any country on the planet after China .
Pundits have tended to downplay the importance of U.S. emissions reductions by pointing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in particular , arguing that whatever the U.S. does is functionally irrelevant so long as carbon footprints keep growing there .
“ That ’ s a really good point and that ’ s a really dumb point , ” said Sivan Kartha , senior scientist at the SEI and an author on the Production Gap report , who also worked to develop the fair shares methodology from the Climate Equity Reference Project .
“ Any single country could say ‘ it doesn ’ t matter what we do.
’ We don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anyway .
We reduce our emissions to say that we ’ re carrying our load in this global effort .
If we ’ re not carrying our load then other countries aren ’ t going to want to do their part , especially if you ’ re the wealthiest country in the world and the country that ’ s contributed the most to the problem .
”

Within the UNFCCC, the U.S. has consistently fought off agreements that include binding emissions targets and was instrumental in bringing about the voluntary framework that defines the Paris Agreement. But without more concerted discussions about climate finance—an umbrella term for how to transfer funds mainly from developed to developing nations—rapid mitigation remains a virtual impossibility for small, developing economies. U.S. negotiators have consistently blocked discussions of historical responsibility in favor of arbitrary financing pledges that can be satisfied by loading already indebted countries up with more debt.
Meeting the climate challenge, of course, depends on other nations, too: Climate change is a global problem, and the U.S. now contributes roughly 15 percent of carbon emissions, the second most of any country on the planet after China. Pundits have tended to downplay the importance of U.S. emissions reductions by pointing to rising emissions in India and China, in particular, arguing that whatever the U.S. does is functionally irrelevant so long as carbon footprints keep growing there. “That’s a really good point and that’s a really dumb point,” said Sivan Kartha, senior scientist at the SEI and an author on the Production Gap report, who also worked to develop the fair shares methodology from the Climate Equity Reference Project. “Any single country could say ‘it doesn’t matter what we do.’ We don’t reduce our emissions to save our climate anyway. We reduce our emissions to say that we’re carrying our load in this global effort. If we’re not carrying our load then other countries aren’t going to want to do their part, especially if you’re the wealthiest country in the world and the country that’s contributed the most to the problem.”
The lofty targets governments have committed to in the past few years—driven in large part by an upswell of activism around the climate crisis and insufficient emissions cuts—in theory are promising and would seem to suggest that we’re on track to meet the Paris Agreements goals. But many of these targets promise “net-zero” emissions by some far-off date, promising to either offset climbing emissions for sketchily accounted reductions elsewhere or banking on so-called negative emissions technologies that remain unproven at scale to suck up massive amounts of greenhouse gasses. And thanks to long-held U.S. priorities at the United Nations, the Paris Agreement lacks the kinds of enforcement power that would be necessary to enforce the dramatic declines science suggests are necessary.


newrepublic--2020-12-29--The Midwives of Appalachia Get Organized

When Laura Browning was pregnant for the first time , she knew what she wanted from her birth experience .
She wanted a home birth with a midwife , ideally , and if that wasn ’ t possible , she wanted a nurse-midwife ( who are typically hospital-based ) to deliver her baby .
She associated obstetricians with “ quick in-and-out appointments ” that lacked personal care and warmth .
“ I wanted to know who ’ s going to be delivering my baby—who ’ s going to be catching my baby—and have a relationship with them , ” recalled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her fourth child .
Many women share Browning ’ s misgivings about the medical establishment ’ s attitude toward childbirth .
America ’ s modern OB-GYN-heavy prenatal care system often treats low-risk pregnancies like “ problems ” to be solved by excessive ( and perhaps unnecessary ) hospital interventions rather than something entirely natural that women have been doing forever .
Where the OB-GYN experience can err on the side of strictly clinical , midwives work to build strong relationships with their clients—not treat them like a cog in the medical machine—instilling confidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the simplest or most cost-effective option for the OB-GYN or hospital .
And the birth outcomes speak for themselves .
In addition to the potential for in-depth visits , more involved prenatal education , and even at-home birth , midwifery focuses on helping the birth progress naturally and empowering the laboring woman .
The rate of cesarean sections under midwifery care is 30 percent less for first-time mothers and 40 percent less for second-time mothers than with OB-GYNs , and in a 2013 study , women cared for by midwives were less likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before 24 weeks .

When Laura Browning was pregnant for the first time, she knew what she wanted from her birth experience. She wanted a home birth with a midwife, ideally, and if that wasn’t possible, she wanted a nurse-midwife (who are typically hospital-based) to deliver her baby. She associated obstetricians with “quick in-and-out appointments” that lacked personal care and warmth. “I wanted to know who’s going to be delivering my baby—who’s going to be catching my baby—and have a relationship with them,” recalled Browning, who is now pregnant with her fourth child.
Many women share Browning’s misgivings about the medical establishment’s attitude toward childbirth. America’s modern OB-GYN-heavy prenatal care system often treats low-risk pregnancies like “problems” to be solved by excessive (and perhaps unnecessary) hospital interventions rather than something entirely natural that women have been doing forever. Where the OB-GYN experience can err on the side of strictly clinical, midwives work to build strong relationships with their clients—not treat them like a cog in the medical machine—instilling confidence and connection instead of hastily defaulting to the simplest or most cost-effective option for the OB-GYN or hospital.


newrepublic--2020-12-29--Workers of the Facebook, Unite!

Workers of the Facebook, Unite!

“ I think Facebook is hurting people at scale , ” said a software engineer when he left the company in the summer .
“ I know that I have blood on my hands by now , ” a data scientist who policed political misinformation campaigns around the world for Facebook until earlier this year .
Another data scientist , in a farewell note earlier this month , wrote of the “ many internal forces propping up the production of hateful and violent content , ” adding , “ It also makes it embarrassing to work here.
” And a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to his colleagues , “ AI will not save us .
The implicit vision guiding most of our integrity work today is one where all human discourse is overseen by perfect , fair , omniscient robots owned by Mark Zuckerberg .
This is clearly a dystopia , but one so deeply ingrained we hardly notice it any more.
” Clearly , some Facebook employees are waking up to the dystopia around them .
Once considered one of the to work in Silicon Valley , Facebook is facing—among many crises—an urgent problem of .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ leak to the media with regularity , and the recent documentary The Social Dilemma that misgivings about the company ’ s influence in the world extend to well-compensated former executives .
But such on-the-record discontent tends to surface only when an employee leaves ; the ones who choose to stay typically keep their criticisms anonymous , for fear of violating Facebook ’ s no-leaks policy .
Herein lies an underappreciated path to reforming Facebook .
Everyone in Washington and the media these days is talking about how to break up the tech giant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that dream inches closer to reality .
In early December , the federal government and nearly every state Facebook for engaging in “ predatory ” anti-competitive behavior .
But even if Facebook were forced to spin off WhatsApp and Instagram , as the suit calls for , it would not solve the huge power asymmetries between Facebook ’ s leadership—dominated by Zuckerberg , COO Sheryl Sandberg , and a handful of former —and its employees nor would it do anything to stanch the flood of hate speech and misinformation on its namesake platform @

“I think Facebook is hurting people at scale,” said a software engineer when he left the company in the summer . “I know that I have blood on my hands by now,” lamented a data scientist who policed political misinformation campaigns around the world for Facebook until earlier this year. Another data scientist, in a farewell note earlier this month, wrote of the “many internal forces propping up the production of hateful and violent content,” adding, “It also makes it embarrassing to work here.” And a product designer who also resigned this month said to his colleagues, “AI will not save us. The implicit vision guiding most of our integrity work today is one where all human discourse is overseen by perfect, fair, omniscient robots owned by Mark Zuckerberg. This is clearly a dystopia, but one so deeply ingrained we hardly notice it any more.”
Clearly, some Facebook employees are waking up to the dystopia around them. Once considered one of the best places to work in Silicon Valley, Facebook is facing—among many crises—an urgent problem of tumbling morale . Worker complaints from its middle ranks now leak to the media with regularity, and the recent documentary The Social Dilemma revealed that misgivings about the company’s influence in the world extend to well-compensated former executives. But such on-the-record discontent tends to surface only when an employee leaves; the ones who choose to stay typically keep their criticisms anonymous, for fear of violating Facebook’s no-leaks policy.