TODAY’s Jill Martin gives in-depth look at life during chemo after breast cancer diagnosis

Today

TODAY’s Jill Martin gives in-depth look at life during chemo after breast cancer diagnosis

Maura Hohman – October 4, 2023

After being diagnosed with stage 2 breast cancer earlier this year, TODAY contributor Jill Martin Brooks is getting honest and real about her chemotherapy journey.

She joined TODAY on Oct. 4 after several sessions of “the red devil,” one of the most aggressive types of chemo. The plan is to have eight chemotherapy sessions in total. Jill’s already undergone a double mastectomy and had 17 lymph nodes removed, and she will also undergo a hysterectomy, partially due to her history with fibroids, as well as to reduce her ovarian cancer risk.

“Cancer is the most insidious disease and thing I’ve ever encountered (and) I think I’m a tough cookie,” Jill, 47, told TODAY. “It’s strange because I look like myself. (But) I can look in the mirror, I see the difference, I see that I’ve lost some hair and I see that I don’t have the same sparkle that I like to wake up with.”

Still, continuing to work has been a bright spot for her, even if she doesn’t have the same energy she’s used to, and she’s been able to keep most of her hair and survive chemo with no vomiting. Physical therapy post-mastectomy has helped her feel more in control of her body, as well.

“You picture getting chemotherapy (as) you’re in the bathroom, hurled over,” she explained, adding that that hasn’t been her experience thanks to recent treatment advancements. She also shared that she has a chemo port, which allows her to receive the drug without a needle stick.

Chemo has become a part of her new routine after she appears on TODAY for Steals & Deals every other Wednesday.

“Chemo is cumulative. It gets worse every time. … Every time I sleep for one extra day, so the week after chemo is like, there’s no plans. I’ll be in bed, and I give myself the grace of that,” she explained. “Then, the week after that leading up to the next treatment, you feel OK. So, I schedule Steals & Deals and coming into the studio on days that I have chemotherapy because that’s the day I’m the healthiest.”

“I take off the makeup, and I take off the clothes and then I go from lights, camera, action to like the most devastating thing,” she added.

For some people, each chemotherapy session can be as short as two hours, but Jill’s are taking closer to 12 because she’s undergoing a process called cold-capping to keep her hair. The idea is that the intense cold narrows the blood vessels in the scalp, reducing the amount of the chemo drug that gets into the follicles, preventing as many hairs from falling out, according to BreastCancer.org.

“At the beginning, I (was) like, I’ll just shave my head. And for some people, that is their journey and that’s soothing for them,” Jill recalled. “I’m not a big makeup person. (My hair) has always been something that makes me feel like myself.”

“You want keep as much normality as you can in the abnormal,” she added. She estimated she still has about 70% of her hair.

Another treatment advancement Jill is quick to praise is the steroids she receives to minimize her nausea: “The steroids make you elevated and crazier as my husband would jokingly say, but there are ways … to counteract the things that you typically stereotype chemo to be.”

Showing the reality of life with treatment was important to Jill in order to help others.

“You think I want to be on camera right now with no makeup, my hair in braids because I’m not allowed to brush it, I’m not allowed to color it, I’m not allowed to wash it in the shower?” she said. “I’d rather be dolled up … but this is real and this is life.”

Jill’s family, especially her parents, husband, brother and sister-in-law, have played a huge role in her maintaining her strength during this period, she said.

“I’ve been choosing to fight and it sucks,” she laughed. “It’s a full-time job and I’m trying really hard. It’s so hard watching my parents and my friends watch me. … I think to myself, ‘Thank goodness it’s me because if I had to watch that, no way.'”

The silver lining of the experience is that Jill has been able to slow down a little bit. “I will take time off and I will rest and I will heal and I will work out and I will continue physical therapy, which has been really big part of my journey and I will continue to advocate for women and men to not be afraid of getting (genetic testing), not being afraid of getting treatment because of what it will bring and showcasing … what it is like to live through chemotherapy,” she said.

“You’re living it with me in real time. This part of the story right now. Unfortunately, it doesn’t have a happy ending this minute.”

Some public figures may prefer to undergo such intense medical treatments in private, but Jill is hopeful that sharing what she’s going through can save lives.

“I’ve been with the show for 15 years and I’ve shared the happy, I’ve shared the sad, and now, I’m sharing the scary,” she said. “I feel … I was given this to be able to help and save other people. I truly believe that deep down.”

When Jill first shared her diagnosis, she urged TODAY viewers to talk to their health care providers about genetic testing for cancer risk. She found out she had a mutation to one of her BRCA genes — which dramatically increases risk of breast and other cancers — shortly before receiving her diagnosis. She’d been planning to get a preventive mastectomy until she found out she actually had cancer.

During her Oct. 4 visit to TODAY, that message was unchanged.

“If I had known, this could have been prevented, and so I could have taken steps. That’s one main message I want to make sure I get out,” she said.

Patients battling breast cancer deserve full access to their prescribed treatments

Daytona Beach News – Journal

Patients battling breast cancer deserve full access to their prescribed treatments

By Jeri Francoeur, Daytona Beach News-Journal – October 4, 2023

I am a two-time breast cancer survivor, and have made it my life’s mission to ensure cancer patients have the resources they need to navigate health insurance and other access barriers. I have been involved in advocacy for all patients since I first started working in the medical field.

My personal breast cancer advocacy story began 20 years ago. My best friend was diagnosed with inflammatory breast cancer and was given a 7% chance of surviving. I watched her struggle to find affordable treatment options while time ran out. She lost her battle. I was devastated, and I knew I would never let another woman go through what my friend went through.

Jeri Francoeur

Six months later, I felt a change in my breast tissue. As a physician’s assistant who taught women how to perform self-breast exams, I had a pretty good idea something was off. After my mammogram showed no abnormalities, I begged my healthcare provider to run more tests. A biopsy showed I had noninvasive ductal carcinoma in situ, which is stage zero breast cancer. I was lucky to have a medical background and knew how to advocate for myself through my diagnosis – especially when I was diagnosed again in 2020.

I know the importance of early detection and treatment for breast cancer patients. In the last 10 years, breast cancer treatment development has been incredible. Innovative medicines that offer more effective treatment and fewer side effects are now on the market. Breast cancer patients are now living longer thanks to remarkable research.

Some insurance plans, unfortunately, prevent patients from accessing these innovative and effective treatments. This is the current situation regarding CDK4/6 inhibitors. CDK4/6 inhibitors treat patients with HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer and are rapidly transforming patient outcomes. All three CDK4/6 inhibitors on the market have gained FDA approval, yet they are not all accessible to patients because of insurance barriers.

One of the ways insurance companies can attempt to block access to new and effective treatments like these is by mandating doctors and patients submit to step therapy. Also known as “fail first,” step therapy requires patients to first prove that older, less expensive, or insurer-preferred alternative medications don’t work before coverage is approved for the medicine prescribed for them.

Breast cancer is a serious, life-threatening condition. Implementing step therapy protocols that require patients to try any medicine other than what the doctor prescribed takes away a patient’s valuable time. It allows breast cancer to progress and causes side effects that diminish patients’ quality of life. Breast cancer patients suffer when they cannot get the treatments their medical team prescribes.

No one should stand in the way of patients and their healthcare providers. Healthcare providers have years of education, clinical experience, specialized training, and, most importantly, know their patients. They are the most qualified to create a personalized treatment plan that fits their patient’s needs and tolerance levels.

Breast cancer patients deserve the highest level of care. New and innovative treatment options can help change the breast cancer landscape as we know it. It’s time insurance companies do what’s right and provide equal coverage for treatments that are proven to save lives.

Jeri Francoeur is a two-time breast cancer survivor, patient advocate, and founding member of the Florida Cancer Support Network. She resides in Ormond Beach. 

How to weigh the benefits, risks of radiation therapy for breast cancer

WAGA Fox – Local Articles

How to weigh the benefits, risks of radiation therapy for breast cancer

Beth Galvin – October 3, 2023

https://s.yimg.com/rx/ev/builds/1.0.8/pframe.html

Atlanta – Treating cancer means deciding whether to go with chemotherapy, surgery, radiation, or all or a combination of the above.

“It is very dependent on your particular cancer, and one thing I think the patients should just understand is that no cancer is the same,” says radiation oncologist Dr. Courtney Pollard with Peachtree Radiation Oncology Services, which contracts with Piedmont Healthcare.

Dr. Pollard says the cancer community is always looking for ways to do more with less.

“We’re always trying to make sure that we’re not over-treating folks, whether that be with surgery, radiation or chemotherapy,” Pollard says. “But, all 3 should be looked at as potentially areas where we can ‘de-escalate’. And we’re always trying to fine tune, to make sure we get a less treatment for the best outcomes.”

That is because the same treatment tools that are most effective at treating many cancers — chemotherapy, surgery and radiation therapy — can cause short term and long term negative side effects.

Chemotherapy can trigger pain, fatigue, nausea, anemia, weight changes and other side effects.

In patients with breast cancer or cancers in their chest, radiation therapy can target and destroy malignant cells, but it can also damage healthy heart tissue and blood vessels.

In some patients, that damage can raise the risk of heart disease down the road.

“But, I think it’s a little bit of a misnomer to say that radiation is either falling out favor with patients, or there’s a certain group of doctors that are advising against radiation, because radiation is still a necessary arm in many, many cancers,” Dr. Pollard says.

Breast cancer patients with early stage, lower risk cancers are typically offered breast-sparing surgery followed by radiation therapy and then 5 years of endocrine therapy, taking a daily pill to try to lower their risk of a recurrence.

But, in the LUMINA Study, published recently in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), researchers found women age 55 and older with low risk luminal A breast cancer were able to safely skip radiation therapy after breast surgery, taking the hormone-blocking pill alone, with a low risk of recurrence at the 5-year-mark.

“Now, that’s a great result,” Dr. Pollard says. “It shows that we can de-escalate therapy for a certain type of low risk patient. Now, there’s many, many different types of breast cancer, and we have to be very careful with saying that this is going to be applicable to the wide population of breast cancer patients. But, that very specific subset, it looks like it might be beneficial.”

In their summary in the NEJM article, the study authors write, “Our study showed that women 55 years of age or older with T1N0, grade 1 or 2, luminal A breast cancer had a very low risk of local recurrence at 5 years after breast-conserving surgery when treated with endocrine therapy alone. The prospective and controlled nature of this study supports our conclusion that such patients are candidates for omission of radiotherapy.”

Dr. Pollard says the study, which followed nearly 500 women at 26 Canadian cancer centers, had some limitations.

“It’s a single-arm study,” he says. “So, they only looked at patients that received one sort of therapy. It was not a comparison trial.”

Navigating your cancer treatment options can be challenging.

If you’re newly diagnosed, Dr. Pollard says, find a cancer center that takes a multidisciplinary approach to deciding how to treat you.

Most academic and larger cancer centers have moved to a team approach to treating patients, he says, holding tumor boards that meet regularly to discuss each patient’s options.

“What that means is that patient who has a specific cancer is being evaluated by a doctor that prescribes chemotherapy, a surgeon that can remove their tumor, and a radiation oncologist who can radiate the tumor if it’s necessary,” Pollard explains. “Also, part of the discussion is many other folks: pathologists, diagnostic radiologists, geneticists, therapists. It’s a conglomerate to make a unified best decision for a patient.”

Do I need to worry about sleeping with my phone next to my bed?

Yahoo! Life

Do I need to worry about sleeping with my phone next to my bed?

Kaitlin Reilly – October 4, 2023

Photo illustration of a woman sleeping on a bed resembling an iPhone
Sleeping next to your phone can have an impact on your health. (Photo illustration: Yahoo News; photos: Getty Images) ((Photo Illustration: Yahoo News; Photos: Getty Images))

We know that there can be impacts on your mental health if you scroll through your phone too much during the day. But could where you lay your phone to rest at night affect your health too?

There’s certainly chatter about how cellphones affect our health in general, especially when it comes to the potentially harmful effects of radiation. A July 2023 study published in the journal Cancersfound a positive if weak correlation between death from brain cancer and mobile phone usage. Shabbir Syed Abdul, co-author of the study, told VeryWell Health that “it is crucial to recognize that definitive conclusions cannot be made at this point.”

Should we be worried about radiation when sleeping by a phone?

Dr. Neha Narula, a clinical assistant professor of medicine at Stanford University, agrees that radiation isn’t something you should worry about when it comes to your phone, even if you are sleeping with your phone next to your bed — and head.

“At this time, there’s actually no evidence that supports that the radiation that is emitted from smartphones or tablets affects our health long-term,” Narula tells Yahoo Life, pointing out that the type of radiation emitted from cellphones and tablets is different from, say, the kind we see from X-rays, which we know can cause DNA damage.

“The radiation that comes off of cellphones is what we call ‘nonionizing,’” she says. “This type of radiation, which we see emitted from microwaves and smartphones and things like that, we have no concrete evidence at this time that shows that there are long-term effects or harmful effects on our health.” Of course, we have no concrete evidence that it is not harmful, either, as highlighted by the International Agency for Research on Cancer having classified it as a “possible human carcinogen.”

How using your phone affects sleep

While Narula says that there’s “not too much to be worried about in terms of radiation coming from a phone that’s next to you,” she adds that sleeping next to your phone can have a different kind of impact on your health. For one thing, you’re far more likely to use your phone close to bedtime if it’s right next to where you sleep, and “there has been so much evidence that shows people who do use their phones right before bed or in bed are more likely to have insufficient or poor quality sleep compared to those that kind of put their phones away an hour or two before bed.”

“Phones require a lot of manual control and an active mind to use them,” she says. “That provokes the sense of wakefulness and alertness, which is not ideal for when you are trying to wind down. Stimulation that comes from having a phone next to you, even if you use it for five minutes, you’re still in that active state of arousal, which can impact sleep.”

How light can can have an impact on sleep

Outside of the interaction with one’s phone, the light it emits can be a big problem. Light helps us maintain our circadian rhythm, which is our sleep-wake cycle. Humans, in general, have a 24-hour circadian rhythm, and the natural light coming from the sun helps stimulate feelings of alertness and arousal, which allows us to stay awake during the day. When evening comes, and the light goes down, so does our level of alertness. But smartphones, as well as TVs and tablets, emit light — and our brain can’t distinguish between it and the sun. That interferes with our melatonin production, which is the hormone that makes us feel tired.

“Melatonin levels are generally lower in people who use their phones during bedtime, which can impact our sleep quality, as well as our REM sleep, which is the stage of sleep that we dream — the state of sleep that helps us with emotions and processing memories,” Narula says. “A reduction in REM sleep can interfere with our alertness levels and increase stress in general, which can lead to physical and mental health issues.”

Not everyone needs to give up the phone by their bed

Dr. Rafael Pelayo, professor of sleep medicine at Stanford University and author of How to Sleep: The New Science-Based Solutions for Sleeping Through the Night, says that whether or not you should sleep with your phone next to your bed depends on your relationship with your phone. People with chronic insomnia, for example, may find that sleeping next to their phone increases hypervigilance during bedtime, meaning that they are all too aware of the things that will keep them awake — leading them to get less sleep overall. But the impact of having a phone near your bed can fluctuate with the circumstances of your life.

“If somebody were to tell you, ‘Hey, I may or may not call you at 3 a.m. to pick me up at the airport,’ you’re not going to sleep well that night because at any moment you may expect that phone call, even if it never comes. If the phone enhances that hyper-vigilance in you, then it’s going to disturb your sleep,” he says. “On the other hand, let’s say you live alone, and you worry somebody’s going to break in. Having a phone nearby may provide you a feeling of security. So it’s not the phone, per se, but what it represents to you.”

It’s true NJ, your commute stinks. Census data says it’s third-worst in U.S.

The Bergen Record

It’s true NJ, your commute stinks. Census data says it’s third-worst in U.S.

Manahil Ahmad – October 4, 2023

Recent data on travel times in the United States has found that New Jersey has the third-longest average time people spend getting to work.

The U.S Census shared these results, highlighting the tough daily journeys faced by people in the state of New Jersey due to crowded roads and public transportation.

The study looked at data from big cities all over the country. It showed that in New Jersey, people spend about 30.3 minutes on an average going to work each day. This is almost five minutes more than the national average, showing just how tough commuting is in the Garden State.

Being very close to major cities like New York City and Philadelphia makes things harder, as many folks cross state borders for work, making the traffic situation even worse.

NJ news Clifton councilwoman’s husband, resident scuffle during meeting

About 10% of New Jersey’s workforce commute to New York City alone. the data shows.

Only commuters in New York and Maryland had it worse in 2022, with an average travel time of 33.0 and 30.8 mins respectively.

Within New Jersey, a separate study claimed that Jersey City had the worst commute among cities in the state.

No, America is not seeing an unprecedented surge in immigration. New Census data prove it.

USA Today – Opinion

No, America is not seeing an unprecedented surge in immigration. New Census data prove it.

David Bier – October 3, 2023

The Census Bureau this month published its most robust estimate of the U.S. immigrant population, and it casts doubt on a central Republican criticism of President Joe Biden: that immigration has spiraled out of his control on his watch.

In fact, the new data – analyzed by our team at the Cato Institute – indicate that the number of immigrants is still 2 million below the Census Bureau’s 2017 predictions. The hyperbolic rhetoric should take a backseat to the verifiable data.

Take Stephen Miller, former adviser to President Donald Trump. By July 2022, he had already announced that President Biden had “eradicated his own nation’s borders.”

Of course, this is a goofy conspiracy theory. Borders divide governmental jurisdictions, which it should go without saying haven’t changed, and they have nothing to do with the number of people who cross them. But the new Census data make this claim risible for another reason: The immigrant population had only risen marginally.

Immigrant share of U.S. population is just 13.9%

According to the American Community Survey (the Census Bureau’s annual mini-census), the immigrant share of the U.S. population rose just 0.3 percentage points between July 2021 and July 2022, reaching 13.9%.

If a shift of 0.3 percentage points can eradicate the United States as a country, the Trump administration must have left the United States in worse shape than anyone thought. Fortunately, it is the political rhetoric that is in worse shape, not the country.

New U.S. citizens recite the Pledge of Allegiance at a naturalization ceremony on July 4, 2023, at George Washington's Mount Vernon in Northern Virginia.

The immigrant population did grow by nearly a million from July 2021 to July 2022. But consider the context. In 2017, the Census predicted that by last year, the immigrant population would have grown by 3.6 million. In reality, it grew 1.7 million – less than half the number the models predicted.

Just because the immigrant population isn’t shrinking like Miller wants doesn’t mean that America has ceased to exist.

Fix immigration loophole: I grew up an American – legally. Our broken immigration system forced me to deport.

On a longer timescale, it is apparent that the past decade has seen unusually slow growth in immigration. In fact, the period from 2012 to 2022 saw slower growth in the immigrant share of the population than the 2000s, 1990s, 1980s and 1970s. You have to go all the way back to the 1960s, when the immigrant population actually shrank, to find a lower growth rate.

Nor is America unusual compared with its peer nations. The United States also ranks in the bottom third of wealthy countries for its immigrant population share. America’s actually becoming less competitive for immigrant workers.

How worker shortage hurts the United States

The new Census data are much more important than other estimates of immigration. The American Community Survey collects information on a massive portion of the U.S. population, which prevents significant sampling errors, and it accounts not just for the number of immigrants coming in but also the numbers who are deported, leave on their own or die.

The new data dismantle the narrative that the United States is seeing an unprecedented surge in immigration. Moreover, as we face the lowest population growth in U.S. history, a decline largely attributed to Americans having fewer children, the immigrant share of the population should naturally have a larger impact. But even in these conditions, the immigrant share is growing at the slowest rate we’ve seen in a generation.

Of course, the number of immigrants has increased over the past year, too, but the new Census numbers show that we have plenty of room to grow.

US semiconductor production ramps up. But without STEM workforce, we’ll lose the race.

Regardless, the broader concern isn’t just about countering inflated rhetoric but addressing the very real economic challenges the United States faces due to slowing population growth. We’re staring at a massive worker shortage, a precipitous drop in the worker-to-retiree ratio and a worrying exodus of skilled workers to nations like China.

The solution? We need people. We need workers across all skill levels to drive our economy, support our aging population and maintain our global competitive edge. Immigrants have historically played, and can continue to play, a crucial role in filling these gaps.

While it is natural to engage in debates about immigration policy and its implications, it is essential to root these discussions in fact rather than fiction. Instead of raising alarms over exaggerated claims of border erasure, our focus should be on crafting policies that align with our national interests, values and the reality reflected in the data.

After all, America thrives when it welcomes, integrates and capitalizes on the diverse skills and perspectives that immigrants bring to our shores.

David Bier is the associate director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute.

Supreme Court Weighs Fate of Consumer Agency That Vexes Banks, Riles GOP

Bloomberg

Supreme Court Weighs Fate of Consumer Agency That Vexes Banks, Riles GOP

Greg Stohr – October 2, 2023

Thirteen years after a Democratic-controlled Congress created the CFPB to regulate mortgages and other consumer-finance products, the high court on Tuesday will weigh a novel constitutional argument that the bureau’s supporters say could leave it decimated.

The clash will shape the future of an agency that critics see as the ultimate symbol of an unaccountable and overreaching federal bureaucracy – but that backers including President Joe Biden’s administration say has provided crucial safeguards and an independent check against corporate power in the years since the 2008 financial crisis.

“The CFPB is under attack because it’s good at what it does,” Senator Elizabeth Warren, the Massachusetts Democrat who spearheaded the bureau’s creation, said last week.

The justices, who open their new term Monday, are reviewing a ruling that said the agency’s funding system violates a constitutional provision requiring a congressional appropriation for government spending. The CFPB isn’t subject to the year-to-year congressional appropriation process and instead draws as much money as it needs – up to a cap it has never hit – from the Federal Reserve. In fiscal 2022, the agency received $641.5 million in funding, short of its $734 million cap.

“It’s not about the merits of CFPB,” said Michael Pepson, a lawyer with the conservative Americans for Prosperity Foundation. “It’s about ensuring that Congress doesn’t shirk its duties by passing off its exclusive funding authority to unelected officials.”

The case comes at a time when the CFPB under Biden-appointed Director Rohit Chopra is taking an especially aggressive tack. The agency has sought to stamp out abuses in the mortgage-lending market, scrutinize the use of artificial intelligence in credit underwriting and rein in so-called junk fees, a catch-all term that include charges for bounced checks and late credit-card payments.

The bureau last year reached a $3.7 billion settlement with Wells Fargo & Co. to resolve allegations that it mistreated its customers for years by illegally repossessing cars, bungling record-keeping on payments and improperly charging fees and interest. Beyond banks, the CFPB under Biden has sought to probe “buy-now-pay-later” firms and penalize student lending servicers and credit reporting agencies.

Since the CFPB was created in 2010, its enforcement actions have returned $20.2 billion in compensation, principal reductions, canceled debts, and other relief to consumers, agency spokesperson Samuel Gilford said.

The activity is only fueling longstanding Republican complaints that the agency is too powerful. At a hearing in June, GOP Representative Andy Ogles of Tennessee told Chopra the bureau “should die a painful death.”

Mortgage Worries

Although the high court case centers on a never-enforced payday-lending rule, the impact is potentially far broader. In urging the justices to take up the case, the bureau said the ruling from the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals cast a legal cloud over every action the agency has taken since its creation, providing an argument for re-opening even long-finalized rules and enforcement cases.

That’s a worry shared in part by the mortgage-banking industry, which filed a brief urging the court to limit any ruling against the CFPB. The bureau has issued dozens of rules affecting consumer mortgages and the industry has invested billions of dollars toward compliance, according to three trade groups led by the Mortgage Bankers Association.

A decision calling those rules into question “could set off a wave of challenges and the housing market could descend into chaos, to the detriment of all mortgage borrowers,” the groups argued.

The payday-lending trade group pressing the challenge, the Community Financial Services Association, calls those concerns overblown. Judges have a variety of tools to prevent disruption of the mortgage market, including the six-year statute of limitations that applies to CFPB rules, the group says.

“Lacking any viable legal argument, the bureau resorts to fear-mongering about significant disruption if all the CFPB’s past actions are vacated,” the trade group argued. “But the bureau grossly exaggerates the effects and implications of setting aside this rule.”

Delay Suggested

At a minimum, a decision striking down the payday-lending rule could provide a potent new argument for companies currently battling the CFPB, according to Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Elliot Stein. Navient Corp., which is fighting a complaint over its student-loan servicing practices, could have an especially strong case because it has already raised the issue in its defense, Stein said.

Some industry groups – including the US Chamber of Commerce and the American Bankers Association – have suggested the court could take the unusual step of ruling against the agency but delaying the decision’s effective date to give Congress time to set up a different funding system.

The 5th Circuit ruling marked the first time a federal appeals court had ever used the appropriations clause to strike down part of a federal statute. The Supreme Court has never interpreted the clause as a check on Congress, so far invoking it only as a limitation on the executive branch.

The case is part of a Supreme Court term that could put new constraints on federal administrative agencies. The justices are also considering restricting the use of in-house judges to handle cases at the Securities and Exchange Commission. And the court has agreed to revisit an important 1984 ruling that gives agencies latitude in interpreting ambiguous federal statutes.

The Supreme Court in 2020 gave the president broad power to fire the CFPB’s director, striking down job protections Congress had enacted. At the same time, the court stopped short of abolishing the agency altogether, as critics had sought.

The case is Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial Services Association, 22-448.

With assistance from Katanga Johnson.

Democrats tried to protect the CFPB from politics. The Supreme Court may blow up that plan.

Politico

Democrats tried to protect the CFPB from politics. The Supreme Court may blow up that plan.

Katy O’Donnell – October 2, 2023

Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP Photo

Democrats who created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau a decade ago thought they could shield the agency from political pressure by funding it through the Federal Reserve instead of Congress.

That decision, which drew condemnation from GOP lawmakers and has helped make the regulator a lightning rod for attacks ever since, is facing its biggest test Tuesday when the Supreme Court hears arguments on its constitutionality.

The case is highly anticipated since it could not only result in curbing the agency’s power and throwing its rules into question but potentially affect other regulators throughout the government — including the Fed and the FDIC — that are also not funded by annual congressional spending bills.

“The CFPB has returned $17 billion directly to Americans cheated by financial institutions,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) told POLITICO. “If the Supreme Court disregards over a century of legal precedent, it risks undermining banking regulators safeguarding our economy, as well as Social Security and Medicare.”

Warren, who is credited with conceiving the agency that was created in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis before she became a senator, said the CFPB’s political independence was critical to its formation. Republicans and financial industry critics, many of whom have opposed the bureau since its inception, argue that the funding scheme allows the agency to escape accountability.

Many Democrats see the case as part of a broad-based attack on the regulatory state by Republicans eager to bring challenges before the Supreme Court, whose conservative majority has proved willing to curtail the power of agencies.

In a 2022 ruling limiting the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases, the high court’s six GOP-appointed justices invoked the so-called major questions doctrine, saying that agencies like the EPA need congressional approval before “asserting highly consequential power.” The court has also taken up a case this term challenging the constitutionality of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s in-house enforcement proceedings.

The CFPB was created by the Dodd-Frank Act, the landmark 2010 law that rewrote the rules of finance. The funding mechanism set up by Obama-era Democrats allows the bureau to request the amount of money it needs each year from the Fed, which, in turn, is funded by fees it levies on financial institutions and interest on the securities it holds. The CFPB automatically receives the requested amount, subject to a cap set by Congress.

Among the options the Supreme Court has when it makes its ruling, probably next year, is kicking the matter back to Congress to overhaul the way the bureau is financed — a move that would open the door for other reforms to the agency in an election year.

The case was brought by small-dollar lenders challenging a 2017 CFPB rule restricting their activity. An appellate court ruled last year that the current funding system violates the Constitution’s separation of powers doctrine.

The court scrapped the 2017 rule on the grounds that the CFPB was unconstitutionally funded when it adopted the regulation. The ruling held that the agency’s self-determined budget drawn from an agency that is itself not funded by appropriations marked a “double insulation from Congress’ purse strings,” a unique setup even among financial regulators.

The government maintains that Congress’s decision to authorize the Fed to fund the agency up to a fixed level amounts to “a standing, capped lump-sum appropriation,” as Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar wrote in an August brief.

Counsel for the payday lender groups, meanwhile, argued that “Congress does not possess unfettered discretion to authorize executive spending, let alone the power to cede virtually unfettered discretion to an agency to determine the size of its own purse in perpetuity,” in their brief to the high court.

If the Supreme Court does decide the funding stream is unconstitutional, the government is urging the justices to “sever” the funding provision from the rest of the law that created the agency.

“A decision invalidating the CFPB’s past actions would be deeply destabilizing” and “threaten profound disruption for consumers, regulated businesses, and the nation’s financial markets,” Prelogar said in the brief.

Housing industry representatives have also called on the high court to preserve existing CFPB regulations. They warned of “potentially catastrophic consequences that a decision drawing those rules into doubt could have on the mortgage and real-estate markets,” in an amicus brief submitted by three of the industry’s most powerful trade groups.

The Chamber of Commerce and nine other industry groups, meanwhile, urged the court to “avoid disruptions in consumer financial markets” in their own amicus brief. But the groups, which include the major banking trades, also stated that they “believe they are entitled to” the invalidation of CFPB actions they have challenged in pending lawsuits related to the agency’s funding mechanism. They also said CFPB “enforcement actions should be paused” until Congress resolves its funding.

Court watchers say wholesale invalidation of past CFPB actions is a remote possibility.

“Nobody wants a remedy where they throw every regulation out the window, and I doubt very much if they would do that,” said Alan Kaplinsky, former chair of the consumer financial services group at Ballard Spahr. “If they get to the point where they’ve got to decide the remedy, I think the conservatives and the liberals on that court would prefer to kick the ball over to Congress and let them try to deal with that.”’

The Supreme Court has already ruled that “the Dodd-Frank Act contains an express severability clause” in a 2020 decision holding that another part of the CFPB’s structure, a single director who could only be fired for cause, violated the separation of powers. While that decision eroded some of the bureau’s political insulation, separating out the removal clause from the rest of the law preserved the agency.

Both bureau backers and critics say a key question is whether a ruling against the agency could apply only to the CFPB and not to other regulators with independent funding.

“I think philosophically there are going to be five to six votes that probably would like to decide against the CFPB,” Kaplinsky said. “What they’re not going to want to do is decide the case and in doing that put a big cloud over the constitutionality of the Fed, FDIC and [the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency] — that would be a horrendous result. I don’t think any of them would want that, it would create economic chaos.”

France set to destroy enough wine to fill over 100 Olympic-sized swimming pools: ‘It’s going to cost the nation about $216 million’

The Cool Down

France set to destroy enough wine to fill over 100 Olympic-sized swimming pools: ‘It’s going to cost the nation about $216 million’

Sara Klimek – October 2, 2023

Wine lovers might hate to see millions of gallons of wine destroyed without so much as a taste, but that’s the reality for many vineyards in France amid the changing climate and low demand.

What’s happening? 

The French are currently set to dump 100 Olympic-sized swimming pools worth of wine, estimated to cost the government nearly $216 million, according to The Washington Post.

The European Union gave the country $172 million to destroy 80 million gallons of wine in June 2023, and the French recently announced they had scraped together the remainder of the money needed.

Though it might seem like a waste, this wine is not going down the drain. Producers are expected to use the funds to distill the wine into pure alcohol to be used for other cleaning products and perfumes.

Why is it important?

France is experiencing a wine crisis. Consumption of the beverage has plummeted significantly in the country since its peak in 1926, when the average Frenchperson consumed about 36 gallons every year. Now, that amount hovers around 10.5 gallons. Experts trace the drop in consumption to individuals having more drink options.

A dramatically changing climate also plays a big role in the French wine industry. The above-average temperatures in its wine-growing regions, like Bordeaux, paired with more frequent droughts and storms, are changing how fast the grapes ripen.

Merlot, which encompasses 60% of the vineyard production in Bordeaux, is expected to be one of the first species to succumb to the changing climate entirely.

The adaptions needed to grow wine grapes are becoming more costly for vineyards, which, when paired with the lower demand, is causing it to be cheaper to convert the wine into other products than to grow and sell it.

What’s being done to stop it? 

Experimental laboratories in France are looking for more drought-tolerant grape species that can keep the cost of production low for vineyards and stay alive as the climate continues to change.

Meanwhile, experts hope the wine buy-back will hold space and time to consider alternative solutions. “We need to think in terms of … long-run adaptation to these changing conditions,” said food and wine researcher Olivier Gergaud.

“We need to help this market to transition to a better future, maybe with more wines that would respect the environment. Adaptation to climate change is a real challenge.”

Arizona’s 2023 monsoon leaves us wanting more. Why some of us got rain and others didn’t

AZ Central – The Arizona Republic

Arizona’s 2023 monsoon leaves us wanting more. Why some of us got rain and others didn’t

Kye Graves, Arizona Republic – September 29, 2023

Arizona’s 2023 monsoon season left a lot to be desired, from below-average rainfall numbers across the state to record-setting heat streaks, and the spectacle that often provides widespread relief to the region was sorely missed.

The scope of the season’s impact, while minimal, was exacerbated by the scalding summer conditions and multiple heat records in a slew of categories.

Thunderstorms were hard to come by this year. Rainfall totals for the monsoon season, which ends Sept. 30, will likely result in the driest-ever summer season at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, where the National Weather Service records the official figure. The rain gauge there posted just 0.15 of an inch, less than half the total of 1924, previously the driest with 0.35 of an inch.

Some areas did fare better, primarily in the East Valley and Cave Creek, where some gauges snagged upward of 4 inches, but the spotty season will still place Maricopa County on the infamous dry list behind 2020’s “Nonsoon.”

Ultimately, this lack of storms helped fuel the full effect of triple-digit temperatures and the sweltering sun to be felt across the state.

In fact, each of the three branches of the National Weather Service — Flagstaff, Phoenix and Tucson — recorded Julys that surpassed the month in years prior, posting their hottest-ever totals.

The sun silhouettes the air traffic control tower at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport in Phoenix on Sept. 6, 2023. An excessive heat watch for this weekend was issued by the National Weather Service.
Flagstaff sees hottest monsoon season on record; Tucson and Phoenix hottest-ever Julys

Climate summary data from the weather service’s website highlights the month’s ferocity. In the Phoenix area, for example, average high temperatures for July were 114.7 degrees, more than eight degrees above the recorded norm between the years 1991-2020.

The average mean temperature was 102.7 degrees, about seven degrees higher than the recorded norm. The most revealing stat was for warm-lows, as nights in Phoenix averaged 90.8 degrees, more than six degrees north of the month’s typical mean.

For Tucson and Flagstaff, climate reports echo a similar song. Tucson posted its hottest July, with an average monthly temperature of 94.2, six degrees hotter than normal. Flagstaff witnessed its warmest July, with a 4.7-degree temperature spike above its typical mark, bringing the overall average figure for the month to 71.4 degrees.

Flagstaff is on pace for its warmest monsoon season on record by just 0.2 degrees, surpassing the number one spot set in 1980.

Rainfall totals shallow compared to recent years

Total precipitation for 2023’s monsoon, recorded at Phoenix Sky Harbor, Flagstaff Pulliam and Tucson International airports, varied across the board:

  • Flagstaff: 4.24 inches
  • Tucson: 4.73 inches
  • Phoenix: 0.15 of an inch

As a whole, the deviation from the norm for Tucson is not that negative.

A typical season usually produces around 5.7 inches of rain for Tucson’s airport, coming mainly in July and August. This was mirrored in 2023, as the prime months brought 2 and 2.39 inches, respectively, making up for a zero in the June column and a lackluster September

Tucson held close to its 2022 mark as well, coming just 0.20 of an inch from eclipsing that year’s total.

In Flagstaff and Phoenix, things get a lot less pretty.

At the high country’s airport, 2023’s accumulation of 4.24 inches puts it well below its average of 7.68. The year was also dwarfed in comparison to 2022 (10.63 inches) and 2021 (10.90 inches).

In Phoenix, Sky Harbor caught an abysmal 0.15 of an inch of rain this season, easily placing it as the driest on record, pushing out 1924 at 0.35 of an inch. Usually, Sky Harbor gets around 2.43 inches of rain during the season.

When compared even to 2020’s “Nonsoon,” a total that both Tucson and Flagstaff handily exceeded, Phoenix’s 2023 comes nowhere close. Sky Harbor got exactly 1 inch of rain that year, according to NWS statistics.

Overall for Arizona, precipitation in 2023 was more in line with typical seasons than that of 2020 and 2021.

“I would say as far as precipitation patterns, it was more typical because of the variability,” NOAA Warning Coordination Meteorologist Kenneth Drozd told The Arizona Republic. “(In) 2022, there were more places that were above normal than below normal, but it was still pretty mixed. Kind of like this year, there are more places that are below normal than above normal, but it still varies quite a bit depending on where you’re at.”

In 2020 and 2021, Drozd said, conditions were “unique” because of their widespread consistencies, with 2020 being so dry and 2021 being much wetter.

Maricopa County on pace to be wetter than 2020

While Sky Habor couldn’t catch a break, Arizona’s most populous county as a whole is set to end the monsoon season in a better position.

According to data from the Maricopa County Flood Control District, the county posted wetter numbers than it did in 2020, in large part due to healthier amounts falling in Cave Creek, Wickenburg, Apache Junction and portions of the East Valley.

Throughout Maricopa County, totals from data stretching back 108 days from the season’s Saturday endpoint bounce around from lows in central Phoenix at 0.39 of an inch to upward of four inches in parts of Cave Creek.

A notable area that performed the best in the county was near rural Crown King north of the Valley, where there were spots receiving nearly eight inches during the storm span.

“In general, the closer to the mountains you are, the more rain you’re going to receive during monsoon because the storms form over them,” National Weather Service Phoenix office meteorologist Mark O’Malley told The Republic. “That just became exacerbated this year where the areas of south Phoenix through Laveen, down through Avondale and Goodyear, some areas didn’t even receive a tenth of an inch.”

According to O’Malley, the lack of storms this season was primarily due to the weather pattern setting up with strong high pressure over southern Arizona, bringing hotter temperatures and lackluster storms.

“The weather pattern was set up to where it favored the heat and the storms were more removed from the area, more frequently,” O’Malley said.

SRP: 3 monsoons touched down in the Valley in 2023

According to data from Salt River Project, three major monsoon storms hit metro Phoenix in 2023: on July 26Aug. 31 and Sept. 12.

These storms left their marks, too, with SRP reporting estimated outage numbers at the height of each storm:

  • July 26: 50,000 customers out of power
  • Aug. 31: 71,000 customers out of power
  • Sept. 12: 39,000 customers out of power

APS customers were affected as well, with the company reporting approximate outages during peak storm hours:

  • July 26: 7,750 customers without power
  • Aug. 31: 18,000 customers without power
  • Sept. 12: 11,000 customers without power

Each event brought its own force, bringing down power lines, overturning planes, destroying mobile homes and uprooting trees. While par for the course during the season, rainfall totals certainly weren’t.

The Maricopa County Flood Control District’s point rainfall data paints a clear picture of how dry the year was.

For July 26, chunks of the storm covered the greater Phoenix area into Scottsdale and swaths of the East Valley, with downtown Phoenix only registering 0.04 of an inch of rain. Paradise Valley and Apache Junction received as much as one full inch during the duration of the storm.

On Aug. 31, more portions of Maricopa County got involved but with far less rain. Only two areas throughout the metro saw upward of a half inch. Much of the rain that fell did so in the Cave Creek and New River areas, ranging from 1.45 to 3 inches through the course of the storm.

A storm on Sept. 12 produced the best results for the Valley, with multiple areas getting over the half-inch hump. Again, much of the wealth ended up in Cave Creek, with various areas tabulating over 1.5 inches.