The lakes in California that have been swallowed up by the ‘megadrought’

Take a look at some of the lakes in California that have been swallowed up by the ‘megadrought’

Take a look at some of the lakes in California that have been swallowed up by the ‘megadrought’
California drought
Associated Press

  • California has been hit by a “megadrought” that has dried up key reservoirs in the state.
  • Entire lakes have shrunk exponentially, leaving yachts and docks beached on dry land.
  • Nearly 95% of the state is experiencing “severe drought” and is susceptible to wild fires.

California is facing its worst drought in over four years.

Over 37 million people have already been impacted by the “megadrought” and nearly 95% of the state has been classified as experiencing “Severe Drought,” which puts the land in significant danger of wildfires, according to the National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS).

Last year, California land was consumed by over 8,200 wildfires – a number double the state’s previous record. This year, scorching weather has dried out reservoirs and made the state even more susceptible to breakout wildfires than the record 2020 season. NIDIS analysts call the outlook for the land “grim.”

california wildfire
October 15, 2017. Jim Urquhart/Reuters

 

Water levels of California’s over 1,500 reservoirs are 50% lower than they should be at this time of year, Jay Lund, co-director of the Center for Watershed Sciences at UC-Davis told the Associated Press.

In April, scorching weather turned the San Gabriel reservoir lake bed to dust. The reservoir is not expected to see rain fall until the end of the year.

The drought turned the San Gabriel reservoir lake bed to dust
The drought turned the San Gabriel reservoir lake bed to dust Getty

On Wednesday, the drought dried up a lake so much that it potentially exposed a decades old mystery, allowing officials to find a plane that had crashed in 1965.

A composite image showing Folsom Lake, California, at drought levels in 2017, and a sonar image of a plane underwater there.
Folsom Lake, California, under drought conditions in 2017 (L), and the sonar image of a plane there taken by Seafloor Systems (R) Robert Galbraith/Reuters/CBS13

 

The California drought has been caused by climate change which has pushed temperatures an average of about 2 degrees hotter, drying out soil and melting Sierra snow rivers, which causes less water to soak into the ground, as well as flow through rivers and reservoirs. The state also endured two unusually dry winters that didn’t bring needed storms to the area.

Officials are predicting the water level of Lake Oroville – a primary body of water that helps the state generate energy through hydroelectric power plants – will hit a record low in August. If that happens, they would need to shut down a major hydroelectric power plant, putting extra strain on the electrical grid during the hottest part of the summer.

Earlier this month, about 130 houseboats had to be hauled out of the lake as its water levels hit 38% capacity. The water levels are only at about 45% of average June levels, according to California Department of Water Resources.

House boats pulled out of Lake Orovill
Getty

 

It’s going to be a rough summer for boat owners in the state.

Pictures from the Associated Press show massive lakes have run dry, leaving boats and docks completely beached

Boats at Fulsom Lake
Associated Press

 

Experts say the drought could devastate local wildlife populations, as well as California’s tourism industry.

California drought
Associated Press

 

In April, Governor Gavin Newsom held a press conference in the dried up waterbed of Lake Mendocino. Where he stood there should have been about 40 feet of water.

“This is without precedent,” Newsom said. “Oftentimes we overstate the word historic, but this is indeed an historic moment.”

California drought
Associated Press

 

The month before, the California Department of Water Resources reduced farmers and growers to 5% of their expected water allocation in March. A move that has farmers leaving large portions of their land unseeded, while other have been forced to purchase supplemental water, which comes at a hefty cost. Supplemental water was priced at $1,500 to $2,000 per acre-foot in mid-May, according to a report from California Farm Bureau.

It has also made it difficult for ranchers to feed and water their livestock

California drought
Getty

 

As California temperatures continue to rise while water reservoirs fall, the state could be in for a devastating summer. From increased fears for wildfires to the impact on state agriculture and tourism, California residents are bracing for the worst drought season since 2014.

Sugar isn’t just empty, fattening calories — it’s making us sick

Sugar isn’t just empty, fattening calories — it’s making us sick

<span class="caption">Don't add sugar.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="link rapid-noclick-resp" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-116939734/stock-photo-wooden-bowl-of-sugar-with-metal-spoon.html?src=JQV6o_KbozN-HPe3TJY8Mg-1-64" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" data-ylk="slk:Sugar bowl via www.shutterstock.com">Sugar bowl via www.shutterstock.com</a></span>
Don’t add sugar. Sugar bowl via www.shutterstock.com

 

Children are manifesting increased rates of adult diseases like hypertension or high triglycerides. And they are getting diseases that used to be unheard of in children, like Type 2 diabetes and fatty liver disease. So why is this happening?

Everyone assumes this is the result of the obesity epidemic – too many calories in, too few out. Children and adults are getting fat, so they’re getting sick. And it is generally assumed that no one specific food causes it, because “a calorie is a calorie”.

I’ve been studying the role that sugar plays in contributing to chronic disease for years, and my research group at the University of California, San Francisco has just published research in the journal Obesity that challenges this assumption. If calories come from sugar, they just aren’t the same.

Diabetes is increasing faster than obesity

It’s clear that the cause of rising rates of health conditions like Type 2 diabetes isn’t as simple as people just eating too many calories.

Obesity is increasing globally at 1% per year, while diabetes is increasing globally at 4% per year. If diabetes were just a subset of obesity, how can you explain its more rapid increase?

And certain countries are obese without being diabetic (such as Iceland, Mongolia and Micronesia), while other countries are diabetic without being obese (India, Pakistan and China, for instance). Twelve percent of people in China have diabetes, but the obesity rate is much lower. The US is the fattest nation on Earth and our diabetes prevalence is 9.3%.

While 80% of the obese population in the US is metabolically ill (meaning they have conditions like diabetes, hypertension, lipid problems and heart disease), 20% is not. Conversely, 40% of the normal weight population has metabolic syndrome.

If normal weight people have these conditions, how then are they related to obesity? Indeed, we now know that obesity is a marker rather than a cause for these diseases.

Epidemiological studies have found a correlation between added sugar consumption and health conditions like cardiovascular disease. So could cutting excess sugar out of our diets reverse metabolic syndrome?

What happens when you stop feeding kids added sugar?

Our group at UCSF studied 43 Latino and African-American children with obesity and metabolic syndrome over a 10-day period. We started by assessing their metabolic status – insulin and glucose levels, as well as blood fats and other markers for disease, like lactate and free fatty acids – on their home diet.

For the next nine days, each child ate an individual tailored diet. We catered their meals to provide same number of calories and protein and fat content as their usual home diet. We gave them the same percentage of carbohydrate, but we substituted starch for sugar. The big difference: this special diet had no added sugar. This means their diet had no sugar from sugarcane or high fructose corn syrup. The kids consumed foods such as fruits and other whole foods that naturally contain some sugar. These foods also have fiber, which reduces the rate of sugar absorption, so they don’t affect the body the same way that added sugar does.

We took chicken teriyaki out. We put turkey hot dogs in. We took sweetened yogurt out. We put baked potato chips in. We took donuts out. We put bagels in. We gave them unhealthy processed food, just with no added sugar. Each child was given a scale to take home, and if their weight was declining, we made them eat more. Then we studied them again.

The children had eaten the same number of calories and had not lost any weight, and yet every aspect of their metabolic health improved. With added sugar cut out of their diet for 10 days, blood pressure, triglycerides, low-density lipoprotein (LDL, or “bad cholesterol”), insulin sensitivity and glucose tolerance all improved. And remember, we weren’t giving them just leafy greens and tofu – we fed the kids processed foods, just ones without sugar.

Further studies are needed to see if this will also work in adults, and if the benefits are short-term or long-term.

Sugar is like alcohol

This study demonstrates that a calorie is not a calorie, and that sugar is a primary contributor to metabolic syndrome, unrelated to calories or weight gain. By removing added sugar, we improved metabolic health.

Sugar may not be the only contributor to chronic disease, but it is far and away the easiest one to avoid. Kids could improve their metabolic health – even while continuing to eat processed food – just by dumping the sugar. Can you imagine how much healthier they’d be if they ate real food?

The naysayers will say, “But sugar is natural. Sugar has been with us for thousands of years. Sugar is food, and how can food be toxic?”

Webster’s Dictionary defines food as:

material consisting essentially of protein, carbohydrate, and fat used in the body of an organism to sustain growth, repair, and vital processes and to furnish energy.

Sugar by itself furnishes energy, and that’s about it. In that sense, sugar is like alcohol. It’s got calories, but it’s not nutrition. There’s no biochemical reaction that requires it. And at high doses, alcohol can fry your liver.

Same with sugar. Fructose, the sweet molecule in sugar, contains calories that you can burn for energy, but it’s not nutrition, because there’s no biochemical reaction that requires it. In excess, it can fry your liver, just like alcohol. And this makes sense, because where do you get alcohol from? Fermentation of sugar.

Too much sugar causes diabetes, heart disease, fatty liver disease and tooth decay. When consumed in excess, it’s a toxin. And it’s addictive – just like alcohol. That’s why children are getting the diseases of alcohol – Type 2 diabetes and fatty liver disease – without alcohol. But our research suggests we could turn this around in 10 days – if we chose to.

Read more:

Robert Lustig does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

My front row seat to the radicalization of the Republican Party

Op-Ed: My front row seat to the radicalization of the Republican Party

Future House Speaker Newt Gingrich of Georgia looks over his shoulder as he arrives for a Capitol Hill news conference, Monday, Dec. 5, 1994 in Washington, after his fellow Republicans voted him as speaker. To serve alongside Gingrich, the Republicans voted Rep. Dick Armey, R-Texas, as House Majority Leader and Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, as House Majority Whip. (AP Photo/John Duricka)
Newt Gingrich at a Capitol Hill news conference on Dec. 5, 1994, after his fellow Republicans voted him in as speaker of the House. (John Duricka / Associated Press)

 

Since before he became president, Joe Biden has told crowds, “Folks, this is not your father’s Republican Party.” As a political reporter, I’d been hearing that lament since the late 1990’s, from far better sources — those Republican fathers’ sons and daughters.

The radicalization of the Republican Party has been the biggest story of my career. I’ve been watching it from the start, from the time I arrived in then-Democratic Texas just out of college in 1978 to my years as a reporter in Washington through four revolutions — Ronald Reagan’s, Newt Gingrich’s, the tea party’s and Donald Trump’s — each of which took the party farther right.

From this perspective, it seems clear that the antidemocratic drift of the GOP will continue, regardless of Trump’s role. He didn’t cause its crackup, he accelerated it. He took ownership of the party’s base, and gave license to its racists, conspiracists, zealots and even self-styled paramilitaries, but that base had been calling the shots in the Republican Party for some years, spurred by conservative media. Now, emboldened, its activists will carry on with or without him.

The first elections I covered in 1978, at the midterm of Jimmy Carter’s presidency, marked the beginning of the Republican Party’s reemergence from its Watergate ruins and the shift of its base from the north to the south. In a poll a year earlier, fewer than 1 in 5 Americans had identified as Republicans. Texas was a Democratic bastion. But many Democrats I met there were more conservative than Republicans I knew up north; they often bucked the national party, yet remained “yellow dog Democrats” in state and local elections — so loyal, the saying went, that they’d vote for a yellow dog over a Republican, just like voters elsewhere in the South.

Republicans revived nationally in the late ’70s largely because of the governing Democrats’ misfortunes — a global energy crisis, double-digit inflation, a stagnant economy, party infighting.

Evangelicals threw off their longtime aversion to earthly politics and took over local party organizations, becoming culture warriors. By mid-1978, the property tax revolt in California kindled an anti-tax movement nationwide. With both moderate establishment Republicans and insurgent conservatives seeing the possibility of retaking the White House in 1980, the two camps intensified their decades-long war to define the party.

It’s clear now that the norms-abiding moderates never had a chance. As right-wing activist Paul Weyrich warned, “We are different from previous generations of conservatives. We are no longer working to preserve the status quo. We are radicals, working to overturn the present power structure in the country.” That could stand as conservatives’ mission statement today.

That November, my election-night story for the Abilene Reporter-News included mention of the defeat of a young George W. Bush for a House seat representing Midland and Odessa.

Yet he and other Republicans across the South did better than expected. Some actually won, including third-time candidate Newt Gingrich in suburban Atlanta. Texans elected the first Republican governor since Reconstruction. It all signaled the wave Reagan would ride two years later, carrying other Republicans in his wake. The Democrats who won congressional races across the south, replacing some New Deal liberals who retired, were more conservative and allies-in-waiting for Reagan, many of them future defectors to his party.

By 1984, I’d moved to Washington to cover Congress and got to know Gingrich. While he was a backbencher in House Republicans’ seemingly permanent minority, he led a maverick faction calling itself the Conservative Opportunity Society (Gingrich himself was more opportunist than truly conservative, his lieutenants grumbled to me).

After he read stories I’d written about the ethics scrapes of some Democrats in Congress, Gingrich would have an aide in his congressional office contact me with dirt on others, often just allegations culled from the lawmakers’ local newspapers.

That was just one sign that he was a new breed of Republican, more interested in ruthless partisanship than in passing laws and representing constituents. His goal was nothing short of ending Democrats’ decades-long lock on the House majority and leading the next Republican revolution.

In 1990, Gingrich — by then the second-highest ranking House Republican leader — made a prediction that I found unbelievable: Republicans would win a House majority in the 1994 midterm elections. He explained to me that if George H.W. Bush lost reelection in 1992, with a Democrat in the White House the Republicans could benefit from the midterm jinx for a president’s party, and win enough seats to take control.

Gingrich did his part to weaken Bush. Most famously, he led a conservative mutiny against a bipartisan deficit-reduction deal the president had negotiated, assailing him for violating his “no new taxes” campaign promise.

With Bush’s loss to Bill Clinton, Gingrich immediately looked toward 1994. Since the late 1980s, he had mobilized a nationwide network of right-wing talk-radio hosts emerging in local markets. They echoed his talking points daily.

On election day 1994, Gingrich was confident of big gains — if not a House majority — and certain that conservative media had helped. “I think one of the great changes in the last couple of years was the rise of talk radio, which gives you an alternative validating mechanism,” separate from the mainstream media, he told me. In fact, he was about to be interviewed by a new local host — a young guy named Sean Hannity.

The Republicans triumphed beyond even Gingrich’s messianic dreams, winning House and Senate majorities for the first time since 1952. As the new speaker who’d taken the party to the promised land, Gingrich led a cult of personality presaging Trump’s.

“Be nasty,” he’d tell followers, and he kept conservatives perpetually angry at Democrats and at government generally, with the aid of his right-wing media megaphone.

On the first day of the new Republican-controlled Congress in January 1995, Gingrich had set up “Radio Row” in a Capitol corridor — table after table of talk-show hosts interviewing Republicans for conservative audiences back home. Rush Limbaugh, the king of them all, was declared an honorary House Republican. Collectively, these local celebrities became a power center within the party.

Gingrich would find governing harder and less popular than campaigning, however. He overreached to please the base, shutting down the government in a doomed bid to force deep cuts in domestic programs, and then impeaching Clinton. Within four years, after election losses and scandals, he resigned.

Back in Texas, then-Gov. George W. Bush positioned himself as the un-Gingrich for mainstream voters — a “compassionate conservative” — while telling those on the right he was different from his father: that Jesus Christ was his personal savior, he’d slash taxes, and his foreign policy would eschew interventionist nation-building. (He’d break that last promise big time in Iraq.)

But even as Bush sought to soften his party’s hard lines to win election, the GOP’s nationalistic, protectionist and even nativist populism ran deep. As president, Bush had hoped to build a broader party — for example, by giving millions of undocumented, longtime residents a path to citizenship. But the growing xenophobia among the party’s increasingly white, older and rural base foiled him.

Trump didn’t unleash those forces 16 years later. He simply harnessed and amplified them.

By the end of Bush’s presidency, conservatives were rebellious against both Bush, for his immigration proposals, Mideast wars and rising debt, and the Republican majority in Congress for its overspending and corruption.

After the near-collapse of the financial system and its bailout by the Bush administration, in 2008, Barack Obama became the first Black American elected president. Almost immediately, the third Republican revolution took shape, this one a headless movement from the bottom up: the tea party.

Republican Party leaders sought to unite with tea party activists against their common enemy — Obama. In the midterm elections of Obama’s two terms, Republicans regained control of the House in 2010 and then the Senate in 2014.

Yet just as Gingrich found with Clinton, sharing responsibility for governing requires occasional compromise with the Democratic president on must-pass bills. And compromise infuriated the Republican base and conservative media. “They don’t give a damn about governing,” former Rep. Tom Latham, an Iowa Republican, told me in 2015. Latham, who was first elected in the 1994 Gingrich revolution, had just left Congress in frustration after 20 years.

A year later, against a field of establishment Republicans vying for the presidential nomination, Trump quickly rose to the top, speaking a language of aggrievement that resonated with the mostly white, less educated voters living in rural America and long-struggling industrial areas like my Ohio hometown.

They jumped on the Trump train and stayed on even after he’d lost reelection and the GOP’s control of Congress. As Donald Trump Jr. said of other Republican officials on Jan. 6, just before the attack on the Capitol, “This isn’t their Republican Party anymore. This is Donald Trump’s Republican Party.”

It was a straight line from Gingrich’s uncompromising, smash-mouth politics to the tea party and then to Trump.

Should Trump remain exiled at Mar-a-Lago, his MAGA army will soldier on, forcing party officials and 2024 presidential aspirants to fall in line. And if Republicans lose in 2022 or 2024, many seem poised to reject the result, turn to force or countenance those who do — Trump or no Trump.

Jackie Calmes is the White House editor for the Los Angeles Times. This article is adapted from her book “Dissent: The Radicalization of the Republican Party and Its Capture of the Court,” which will be published June 15.

Insurance Giants Under Fire from First Nations for Backing Trans Mountain Tar Sands Pipeline

DeSmog

Insurance Giants Under Fire from First Nations for Backing Trans Mountain Tar Sands Pipeline

Dozens of events on four continents hope to turn up the pressure on the insurance industry that underwrites Canada’s Trans Mountain Expansion pipeline.
By Nick Cunningham               
 
International Indigenous Youth Council protest outside Port of Long Beach, CA. Credit: IICY LA

Indigenous peoples in Canada and a coalition of environmental groups launched a “Global Week of Action” for June 14-21, aimed at pressuring an array of insurance companies to cut ties with a long-distance tar sands pipeline under construction in Canada.

On Wednesday, the Braided Warriors, an Indigenous youth group in British Columbia, held a rally in front of Chubb Insurance Canada in Vancouver, B.C. On Friday, activists in London are set to protest outside Lloyd’s of London — one of the world’s largest insurers of fossil fuels. Other acts of solidarity are planned as far away as the Pacific Islands and Sierra Leone.

The Indigenous and environmental groups are targeting the handful of global insurance companies that provide coverage for the Trans Mountain pipeline system, a long-distance pipeline running from Alberta’s tar sands to the Pacific Coast near Vancouver.

Canoe protest in Manitoba. Credit: Manitoba Energy Justice Coalition

 

The original pipeline has been operating for decades, but Canada is building what has been termed a “twin” pipeline that would nearly triple the capacity of the existing system to 890,000 barrels of oil per day. For years the Trans Mountain Expansion struggled to get off the ground. It met intense resistance from multiple First Nations in British Columbia, and as it became ensnared in legal limbo, it grew into a financial boondoggle.

The former owner Kinder Morgan sought to bail on the project, and instead of letting it die, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau bought the system in 2018 for C$4.5 billion, effectively nationalizing it to keep it alive and push it forward.

Since then, the Trans Mountain Expansion has broken ground, felling trees and digging trenches along part of its 700-mile route. At the start of 2021, the project was roughly 22 percent completed, and despite the ballooning cost, is scheduled to come online at the end of 2022.

“The Trans Mountain pipeline and tanker project is an existential threat to Tsleil-Waututh Nation. It also fuels the climate crisis, which is a threat to us all. This is why Tsleil-Waututh Nation does not grant our Free, Prior, Informed Consent, and why we are calling on all insurance companies to drop Trans Mountain and recognize the violation of Indigenous rights as a material risk,” Charlene Aleck of the Tsleil-Waututh Nation Sacred Trust Initiative, said in a statement.

The Tsleil-Waututh Nation has lived on the Burrard Inlet in what is now Vancouver for millennia. The expanded pipeline system is estimated to result in a sevenfold increase in oil tanker traffic in the inlet. That would boost the number of tankers navigating the island-studded waters leading to the pipeline’s terminal from 60 per year currently to over 400 per year. A technical assessment conducted by the Tsleil-Waututh Nation found that there is a 79 to 87 percent likelihood of an oil spill in the inlet over a 50-year period.

Turning up the Pressure

But completion is not inevitable, and First Nations and environmental groups opposed to the project see the insurance industry as a key point of leverage. Without insurance, the pipeline cannot proceed.

DeSmog previously reported on the effort by First Nations and environmental groups to pressure global insurance companies to sever their ties with Trans Mountain, among other acts of resistance.

The campaign has proven to be partially successful thus far. In early June, Argo Group said it would stop insuring the pipeline when its policy expires at the end of August. “This type of project is not currently within Argo’s risk appetite,” Argo said in a statement to Insurance Journal.

Last year, other insurance giants — Zurich Insurance, Talanx, and Munich Re — also backed out. At least 14 major insurance companies have ruled out insuring the pipeline, according to Stand.earth, an environmental group pressuring the industry.

The shrinking pool of insurance is also part of a larger story. Greater scrutiny over the oil industry in general, and Canada’s tar sands in particular — some of the dirtiest forms of oil production — has led to a growing number of insurance companies restricting coverage to the sector.

“They’re standing on the wrong side of history. They should know and understand that the fossil fuel industry is in a state of demise. They shouldn’t be investing their funding into a dying industry that has proven itself to be incredibly destructive to the environment,” Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, president of the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs, told DeSmog, referring to the insurance companies backing the project.

Joe Seeger, an expert in insurance for oil projects, told the CBC that the number of large insurance companies providing coverage to Canadian tar sands has fallen roughly in half over the past decade. “It really is a supply and demand situation where we always go to our clients and have the bad news of [explaining there] are fewer insurers and we have to try to figure out new ways to do the business,” Seeger told the CBC in May.

The insurers that remain have tightened up their offerings. The major insurers in London have restricted the amount of coverage for tar sands operations to just $200 million, according to Willis Towers Watson, an international insurance broker. As recently as 18 months ago, those companies would offer $500 million in coverage.

Activists hand petitions to Chubb Insurance in Zurich, Switzerland. Credit: Campax
Credit: Texas Campaign for the Environment

 

The pressure from activists and First Nations apparently had enough of an impact on the project that Trans Mountain appealed to the Canada Energy Regulator in February to allow them to keep the names of its insurers secret.

In its application, Trans Mountain said that “insurance companies have faced negative pressure for insuring the Trans Mountain Pipeline” and that Trans Mountain “experienced a significant reduction in available insurance capacity” in 2020. If the growing pressure from activists continues, the pipeline operator said, it would “likely result in material loss to Trans Mountain.”

The federal regulator agreed and allowed the insurers to remain confidential. “It’s a troubling example of Trans Mountain’s culture of secrecy and attempts to evade transparency and accountability to its owners, which are the Canadian taxpayers,” Elana Sulakshana, an energy finance campaigner with Rainforest Action Network, told DeSmog.

DeSmog reached out to eight insurers that are thought to be the remaining companies backing the Trans Mountain system — AIG, Chubb, Energy Insurance Limited, Liberty Mutual, Lloyd’s, Starr, Stewart Specialty Risk Underwriting, and W.R. Berkley. AIG declined to comment and the rest did not respond.

Trans Mountain did not respond to a request for comment.

“The key companies that were insuring the project last year have yet to cut ties and for the most part have not commented publicly on their support for the project. And that’s why we’re having this week of action, to ramp up the pressure and keep the public scrutiny on them so that they are forced to respond,” Sulakshana said.

A ‘paradigm shift

Even as the Trans Mountain Expansion is proceeding without the consent of some First Nations, there is something of a reckoning unfolding at the moment in Canada surrounding its relationship with Indigenous communities.

Both British Columbia and the Canadian parliament are moving legislation forward that would align provincial and federal law with the principles laid out in the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), an attempt at some form of reconciliation. On June 16, the Canadian Senate passed the bill.

“Grand Chief Stewart Phillip” by The Narwhal Canada is licensed under CC BY 2.0 

 

The practical impact is unclear as of yet, but the legislation is a “paradigm shift,” according to Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, potentially shifting more power to First Nations when it comes to resource extraction on Indigenous lands.

“We have a federal bill and a provincial bill that seeks to send a strong message to governments at all levels, to industry, business — that it’s a new day,” he said.

But he doesn’t expect the legislation to defuse simmering tension in British Columbia. “We’re expecting to hear the usual racist backlash from industry,” Phillip said. He pointed to the epidemic of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls (MMIWG), concerns about radicalized violence, and also the recent revelation that the remains of 215 children were found on the grounds of the Kamloops Indian Residential School, one of many schools that forcibly sought to assimilate Indigenous children and which operated until the late 1970s. The discovery made national, and indeed, international headlines.

“It’s a very, very volatile situation here in British Columbia,” Phillip said. And the construction of the Trans Mountain Expansion “could be a flashpoint, no doubt about it.”

But opposition to the pipeline continues. “This resistance has been consistent and unrelenting,” Phillip said. “We intend to continue to vigorously oppose TMX [Trans Mountain Expansion] until it’s dead.”

In Congress, Republicans Shrug at Warnings of Democracy in Peril

In Congress, Republicans Shrug at Warnings of Democracy in Peril

The biggest attack on American democracy, these photos will bow to the eyes of superpower

 

  • WASHINGTON — Sen. Christopher S. Murphy concedes that political rhetoric in the nation’s capital can sometimes stray into hysteria, but when it comes to the precarious state of American democracy, he insisted he was not exaggerating the nation’s tilt toward authoritarianism.

“Democrats are always at risk of being hyperbolic,” said Murphy, D-Conn. “I don’t think there’s a risk when it comes to the current state of democratic norms.”

After the norm-shattering presidency of Donald Trump, the violence-inducing bombast over a stolen election, the pressuring of state vote counters, the Capitol riot and the flood of voter curtailment laws rapidly being enacted in Republican-run states, Washington has found itself in an anguished state.

Almost daily, Democrats warn that Republicans are pursuing racist, Jim Crow-inspired voter suppression efforts to disenfranchise tens of millions of citizens, mainly people of color, in a cynical effort to grab power. Metal detectors sit outside the House chamber to prevent lawmakers — particularly Republicans who have boasted of their intention to carry guns everywhere — from bringing weaponry to the floor. Democrats regard their Republican colleagues with suspicion, believing that some of them collaborated with the rioters on Jan. 6.

Republican lawmakers have systematically downplayed or dismissed the dangers, with some breezing over the attack on the Capitol as a largely peaceful protest, and many saying the state voting law changes are to restore “integrity” to the process, even as they give credence to Trump’s false claims of rampant fraud in the 2020 election.

They shrug off Democrats’ warnings of grave danger as the overheated language of politics as usual.

“I haven’t understood for four or five years why we are so quick to spin into a place where part of the country is sure that we no longer have the strength to move forward, as we always have in the past,” said Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri, a member of Republican leadership, noting that the passions of Republican voters today match those of Democratic voters after Trump’s triumph. “Four years ago, there were people in the so-called resistance showing up in all of my offices every week, some of whom were chaining themselves to the door.”

For Democrats, the evidence of looming catastrophe mounts daily. Fourteen states, including politically competitive ones like Florida and Georgia, have enacted 22 laws to curtail early and mail-in ballots, limit polling places and empower partisans to police polling, then oversee the vote tally. Others are likely to follow, including Texas, with its huge share of House seats and electoral votes.

Because Republicans control the legislatures of many states where the 2020 census will force redistricting, the party is already in a strong position to erase the Democrats’ razor-thin majority in the House. Even moderate voting-law changes could bolster Republicans’ chances for the net gain of one vote they need to take back the Senate.

And in the nightmare outcome promulgated by some academics, Republicans have put themselves in a position to dictate the outcome of the 2024 presidential election if the voting is close in swing states.

“Statutory changes in large key electoral battleground states are dangerously politicizing the process of electoral administration, with Republican-controlled legislatures giving themselves the power to override electoral outcomes on unproven allegations,” 188 scholars said in a statement expressing concern about the erosion of democracy.

Sen. Angus King, an independent from Maine who lectured on American politics at Bowdoin College before going to the Senate, put the moment in historical context. He called American democracy “a 240-year experiment that runs against the tide of human history,” and that tide usually leads from and back to authoritarianism.

He said he feared the empowerment of state legislatures to decide election results more than the troubling curtailments of the franchise.

“This is an incredibly dangerous moment, and I don’t think it’s being sufficiently realized as such,” he said.

Republicans contend that much of this is overblown, though some concede the charges sting. Sen. Patrick Toomey, R-Pa., said Democrats were playing a hateful race card to promote voting-rights legislation that is so extreme it would cement Democratic control of Congress for decades.

“I hope that damage isn’t being done,” he added, “but it is always very dangerous to falsely play the race card and let’s face it, that’s what’s being done here.”

Toomey, who voted to convict Trump at his second impeachment trial, said he understood why, in the middle of a deadly pandemic, states sharply liberalized voting rules in 2020, extending mail-in voting, allowing mailed ballots to be counted days after Election Day and setting up ballot drop boxes, curbside polls and weeks of early voting.

But he added that Democrats should understand why state election officials wanted to course correct now that the coronavirus was ebbing.

“Every state needs to strike a balance between two competing values: making it as easy as possible to cast legitimate votes, but also the other, which is equally important: having everybody confident about the authenticity of the votes,” Toomey said.

Trump’s lies about a stolen election, he added, “were more likely to resonate because you had this system that went so far the other way.”

Some other Republicans embrace the notion that they are trying to use their prerogatives as a minority party to safeguard their own power. Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky said the endeavor was the essence of America’s system of representative democracy, distinguishing it from direct democracy, where the majority rules and is free to trample the rights of the minority unimpeded.

“The idea of democracy and majority rule really is what goes against our history and what the country stands for,” Paul said. “The Jim Crow laws came out of democracy. That’s what you get when a majority ignores the rights of others.”

Democrats and their allies push back hard on those arguments. King said the only reason voters lacked confidence in the voting system was that Republicans — especially Trump — told them for months that it was rigged, despite all evidence to the contrary, and now continued to insist that there were abuses in the process that must be fixed.

“That’s like pleading for mercy as an orphan after you killed both your parents,” he said.

Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., said in no way could some of the new state voting laws be seen as a necessary course correction. “Not being able to serve somebody water who’s waiting in line? I mean, come on,” he said. “There are elements that are in most of these proposals where you look at it and you say, ‘That violates the common-sense test.’”

Missteps by Democrats have fortified Republicans’ attempts to downplay the dangers. Some of them, including President Joe Biden, have mischaracterized Georgia’s voting law, handing Republicans ammunition to say that Democrats were willfully distorting what was happening at the state level.

The state’s 98-page voting law, passed after the narrow victories for Biden and two Democratic candidates for Senate, would make absentee voting harder and create restrictions and complications for millions of voters, many of them people of color.

But Biden falsely claimed that the law — which he labeled “un-American” and “sick” — had slapped new restrictions on early voting to bar people from voting after 5 p.m. Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, the majority leader, said the Georgia law had ended early voting on Sunday. It didn’t.

And the sweep — critics say overreach — of the Democrats’ answer to Republican voter laws, the For the People Act, has undermined Democratic claims that the fate of the republic relies on its passage. Even some Democrats are uncomfortable with the act’s breadth, including an advancement of statehood for the District of Columbia with its assurance of two more senators, almost certainly Democratic; its public financing of elections; its nullification of most voter identification laws; and its mandatory prescriptions for early and mail-in voting.

“They want to put a thumb on the scale of future elections,” Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said Wednesday. “They want to take power away from the voters and the states, and give themselves every partisan advantage that they can.”

Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, who could conceivably be a partner in Democratic efforts to expand voting rights, called the legislation a “fundamentally unserious” bill.

Republican leaders have sought to take the current argument from the lofty heights of history to the nitty-gritty of legislation. Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader, pointed to the success of bipartisan efforts such as passage of a bill to combat hate crimes against Asian Americans, approval of a broad China competition measure and current talks to forge compromises on infrastructure and criminal justice as proof that Democratic catastrophizing over the state of American governance was overblown.

But Democrats are not assuaged.

“Not to diminish the importance of the work we’ve done here, but democracy itself is what we’re talking about,” said Sen. Brian Schatz of Hawaii. “And to point at other bills that don’t have to do with the fair administration of elections is just an attempt to distract while all these state legislatures move systematically toward disenfranchising voters who have historically leaned Democrat.”

King said he had had serious conversations with Republican colleagues about the precarious state of American democracy. Authoritarian leaders like Vladimir Putin, Viktor Orban and Adolf Hitler have come to power by election, and stayed in power by warping or obliterating democratic norms.

But, he acknowledged, he has yet to get serious engagement, largely because his colleagues fear the wrath of Trump and his supporters.

“I get the feeling they hope this whole thing will go away,” he said. “They make arguments, but you have the feeling their hearts aren’t in it.”

OPINION: Like Donald Trump, Tennessee GOP voters are delusional

Tribune Publishing

Jun. 12—Tennessee used to be a state with a centrist temperament, a state where in election after election voters cast ballots for moderate politicians of both political stripes — Howard Baker, Fred Thompson, Zach Wamp, Ned McWherter, Bill Frist, Al Gore, Phil Bredesen, Lamar Alexander and Bill Haslam to name a few.

But that’s over. Tennessee Republicans are no longer centrists and moderates. They are now leaning hard, hard right — and straight over the edge of a flat earth.

Judging from a recent Vanderbilt University survey of 1,000 registered voters, it isn’t just former president Donald Trump who is delusional in insisting the election was stolen from him.

It’s also 71% of Tennessee’s Republican voters who last month told Vandy pollsters they agreed with the statement: “Joe Biden stole the 2020 presidential election.”

And why not? As disheartening as it is, it shouldn’t be completely surprising. Tennessee’s new hard-right politicians bang the drum daily on social media and Fox News, peppering Tennesseans with continued references to Trump and his ever-increasing false claims.

Never mind that the “big lie” of a rigged or stolen election was soundly rejected by state officials, the courts, the Electoral College, Trump’s own administration and eventually Congress — which acted to certify the results amid a Capitol breach by a violent mob of Trump supporters.

You already know how Republicans answered that question posed in the statewide survey by Vanderbilt’s Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions in Nashville. But among all of those 1,000 voters, only 40% agreed with the big lie; among independents, 30% agreed and among Democrats, only 5% agreed.

“This is a remarkable number — that the vast majority of a political party feels the other party is illegitimate, despite the lack of any evidence,” said Dr. Josh Clinton, a Vanderbilt political science professor and co-director of Vanderbilt’s Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions.

The partisan disconnect doesn’t stop there:

— 37% of Republicans and 30% of Independents said they do not plan to get the COVID-19 vaccine (60% of Republicans and 94% of Democrats said they already are or plan to be vaccinated).

— 90% of Democrats but only 29% of Republicans said they agree that the legacy of slavery affects the position of Black people in today’s America a great deal or a fair amount.

— 57% of Republicans and 8% of Democrats approve of making it legal for those 21 and over to carry a handgun without a permit. (Overall, only 39% of Tennesseans approve.)

Testing the partisan divide, the pollsters ran a small experiment, asking about voters’ support for infrastructure upgrades two different ways.

When respondents were asked if they approved of Biden’s American Jobs Plan that would use $2.3 trillion to upgrade the country’s infrastructure over the next 10 years, including improving roads and bridges, electric grids, drinking water and access to broadband internet, only 29% of Republicans approved while 96% of Democrats approved. But when the question was posed without naming the plan or President Biden, Republican approval for infrastructure doubled — to 59%, while the same 96% of Democrats approved.

It seems those anti-Biden, anti-Democrats Fox News talking points are getting through.

Professor Clinton was more tactful: “The fact that there is broad support for these economic issues when partisan indicators are omitted shows that political context can really affect people’s reactions to important policy issues, depending on how the issues are framed.”

Of course, the Vandy survey isn’t alone in noticing the hard right-wing slide in Tennessee. History is telling, too. Trump won the state in 2020 by 23 percentage points, and the Republican margin of victory has consistently widened in every presidential election since 1996 — the last time the state went to a Democrat.

Former Tennessee Gov. Haslam talked about that slide in a Q & A published last week in The Atlantic about his new book, “Faithful Presence.”

Haslam, a moderate and an evangelical Christian who says he loved being a mayor and loved being governor, faces a dilemma with Tennessee’s new right-wing lean. It’s a place where he’s having a hard time identifying with his own evangelical faith and with his party’s recent direction.

“One of the reasons I wrote the book is this conflation of folks’ personal views of Christianity with the personal political views. This to me is a sign of how far off track the Church has gone. There’s been damage to the Church by the identification with this political cause [Trumpism].”

Haslam told The Atlantic he hasn’t figured out whether he’s going to run for office again, and the magazine noted it’s also not clear that he could win in today’s political environment.

Talking of Tennessee voters, Haslam noted that unlike in Georgia where newcomers helped flip the Peach State blue in 2020, “the folks who are moving here are actually more conservative than the people who were here to begin with.”

Haslam added that Republicans did a good job in the last election of reaching out to more rural voters, even attracting a lot of people who haven’t been heavy voters in the past. But at the same time, the GOP lost a lot of the suburban voters — particularly women.

“As a party, we’re trading high-propensity voters for low-propensity voters,” he said. “That’s a concern for the Republican Party in Tennessee, and everywhere else for that matter.”

Perhaps therein lies another hint as to why 71% of Tennessee’s Republican voters believe the “big lie.”

Guns a danger to their owners most of all

Chicago Suntimes – Opinion

Guns a danger to their owners most of all

 

Gun sales leapt during the COVID lockdown, and a California judge just overturned that state’s ban on assault weapons. Here, a clerk shows a customer a TPM Arms LLC California-legal featureless AR-10 style .308 rifle an Orange County gun show.
Gun sales leapt during the COVID lockdown, and a California judge just overturned that state’s ban on assault weapons. Here, a clerk shows a customer a TPM Arms LLC California-legal featureless AR-10 style .308 rifle an Orange County gun show. PATRICK T. FALLON, Getty

 

There’s no hope for help from laws, but you can protect yourself from guns with common sense.

Or do — it’s your choice. I don’t want you to immediately clutch at yourself and collapse to the floor, writhing and moaning how wronged you are. I’m so tired of that. Grow up. My saying “Don’t buy a gun” isn’t a command from the ooo-scary, all-powerful media.

Rather, it’s just a suggestion. From me. A friendly suggestion. Please don’t buy a gun. Why? They’re dangerous, for starters. And apparently confusing, because the reasons that people typically offer for buying guns — to protect themselves and guard their families — are actually the top reasons not to buy a gun. Gun ownership imperils you and your family.

How? There’s suicide, for starters. Two-thirds of gun deaths are self-inflicted. I don’t want to start throwing numbers at you, since people are flummoxed already. Be assured the odds of killing yourself leap when you buy a gun.

Why isn’t this better known? Imagination trips people up. It’s far easier for men to imagine Freddy Krueger breaking through the door, while much harder to imagine themselves rashly deciding to end it all on some dark night of the soul.

Guess which happens more often? It isn’t that you can’t kill yourself without a gun. Just that guns are such efficient killing machines. Three percent of those who attempt suicide with drugs succeed; 85 percent of those using a gun do.

I know I’m applying rational thought to an area of emotion and frenzy. In the set piece fantasy of male power and safety, guns are a masturbatory aid. Why else would some guys get so worked up over them?

Guns are part of the whole Republican fear junkie scramble. Not only the fear of somebody coming through the door. But fear that guns might get taken away, a terror that gun companies profit by stoking. A reader sent me a laughable letter from the National Rifle Association with “NOTICE OF GUN CONFISCATION” in huge letters on the envelope.

I wish I could share the whole letter. It’s ridiculous. The first three sentences will have to serve: “Dear Friend of Freedom,” it begins. “Unless you fight back starting right now, you face the real threat of having your guns forcibly confiscated by the federal government after the next election. No, I’m not talking about run-of-the-mil gun control. I’m talking about armed government agents storming your house, taking your guns, and hauling you off to prison.”

What does it mean to “fight back ”— any guesses? Of course. Send $30 to the NRA.

If this prompts you to give even more money to the NRA, to spite me, no need to write your vindictive little note. Having rung the Pavlovian bell, I’ll also react here: “Curses, I am so shocked! Foiled again.” (Note to everybody else: ot-nay, eally-ray).

You don’t need a gun. Most police officers never use theirs, not once in their entire career. And in situations when you think you need a gun, you usually don’t. They’re worse than unnecessary; they’re problem multipliers. Guns take whatever situation you’re faced with and make it a thousand times worse.

Look at Deshon Mcadory. If the Lombard barber hadn’t been packing a gun, he’d be out the price of a trim after Christian McDougald supposedly refused to pay for a haircut at his Maywood shop. But Mcadory did — a legally purchased, legally carried gun — so now McDougald is dead, and Mcadory in jail, charged with first-degree murder. I don’t want to speak for Mcadory, but were it me, I’d rather simply be out the $20.

I’ll be honest, I don’t really care if you buy a gun. They’re like vaccines. I’ve got mine. I’m safe, relatively, if you don’t want your vaccine, well, it’s your funeral. I hope you’re OK, but if you’re not, the person to blame is as close as the nearest mirror.

With guns, I don’t have mine. I’m safer because of it. And, frankly, better. I manage to go to the hardware store to buy birdseed without arming or wetting myself; if you can’t do that, well, you have my sympathy. It must be awful to be that afraid without your comfort object, your lethal pacifier, your mechanical teddy bear that sometimes kills people.

Space dwindles, so let’s end as we began, with a sentiment you don’t read nearly enough:

Don’t buy a gun.

600,000 dead: With normal life in reach, covid’s late-stage victims lament what could have been

600,000 dead: With normal life in reach, covid’s late-stage victims lament what could have been

They came so close. Philip Sardelis already had his vaccine appointment in hand. Cinnamon Jamila Key had just received her first shot. Charles Pryor tried but couldn’t get the coronavirus vaccine in time. Alexey Aguilar had been reluctant to commit to such a new medicine but was coming around to the idea.

And then covid-19 took them. On top of the grief and sorrow, their families now also must deal with the unfairness, the eternal mystery of what might have been.

The Americans who have died of covid-19 in recent days and weeks – the people whose deaths have pushed the total U.S. loss from the pandemic to nearly 600,000 – passed away even as their families, friends and neighbors emerged from 15 months of isolation and fear. The juxtaposition is cruel: Here, masks off; workplaces, shops and schools reopening. There, people struggling to breathe, separated from loved ones, silenced by ventilators.

“The finish line is in sight and if you don’t make it now, it’s like the astronauts who make it all the way home and then their capsule splashes down and sinks,” said Peter Paganussi, an emergency room physician in Ranson, W.Va., who still sees new cases of covid, the illness caused by the coronavirus, every day.

Even as the number of Americans dying of covid has plummeted from thousands to hundreds each day, the death toll keeps climbing.

It has taken about as long to move from 500,000 U.S. deaths to 600,000 as it did to go from zero to the first dark marker of 100,000 – about four months. That’s a huge improvement over the harrowing one month it took for the death count to soar from 300,000 to 400,000 last winter.

Covid deaths are becoming relatively rare in some places, basically tracking the pace of vaccinations, which varies enormously state to state – 70% of Vermonters have received at least one dose, compared with only 34% of Mississippians.

But rosier statistics are small solace to families who now find themselves living in communities of reborn freedom and optimism, even as they stumble through a crushing grief, burdened by an overwhelming sense of almost having made it through.

Deaths that came so late, so close to the possibility of protection by a vaccine, “eat at people,” said Therese Rando, clinical director of the Institute for the Study and Treatment of Loss in Rhode Island. “It’s such a violation. They were so close, they weren’t doing anything wrong and for death to take them, it adds to our outrage. It’s very distressing because people were assumed to be right on the cusp of being safe.”

– – –

In the centuries-old tradition of the Ho-Chunk Nation, a relative dresses a deceased tribal member in a skirt, moccasins and a handmade top sewn from patterned fabric. But on the crisp, cool May afternoon in Trempealeau, Wis., when Michelle De Cora was buried, her sister was not permitted to follow the tradition. The funeral home’s coronavirus restrictions required that only its employees touch the body, so the staff took care of dressing her.

A hundred mourners came to pay their respects, but that evening, although her daughter Amanda had invited any and all to “bring a tent and stay the night,” no one did.

“She’d always said she wanted us to have a party when she died, but nobody was really feeling like that, because of covid,” Amanda said.

As May began, Amanda could feel the first wisps of normalcy. “I was finally getting a glimmer of hope,” she said.

Amanda was already fully vaccinated, as was her husband. Their 17-year-old had just received a second shot. Michelle, however, had not gotten around to it.

At 61, Michelle was an obvious candidate to get vaccinated. She had kidney problems. She was diabetic. Her family was nudging her to do it. The Ho-Chunk Nation, the Indian tribe that employed Michelle for many years, has suffered 17 covid deaths among its 8,000 members and made a big push to get shots in arms.

There were reasons Michelle didn’t get around to getting the shot. She’d stayed fairly isolated through the first months of the pandemic. She lived an hour away from the tribal clinic. She’d tested positive for the coronavirus back in December, and though she never had symptoms and her children suspected it’d been a false positive, she believed she had at least some protection from the virus.

“So she never went,” Amanda said.

Michelle entered the hospital in early May to deal with her long-standing kidney condition – she’d spent many months in the queue for a transplant. But then the coronavirus test that was routinely administered to new patients came back positive.

Amanda was immediately told she had to leave, and her mother was transferred to the covid ward.

“Within a couple of days, they went from saying, ‘She’ll be OK, she’ll be home in a few days’ to ‘We can’t do anything else for her,’ ” Amanda said. “We talked on the phone after that, but she was really out of breath, and then they put the [oxygen] mask on her and she couldn’t talk much.”

Early on in the pandemic, Michelle had mainly stayed home.

“My son would drop off groceries for her,” said Amanda, who spoke to her mother mostly by phone through those months.

Even at home, Michelle kept busy, right up to her last days, working on Ho-Chunk politics, seriously considering a run for the tribal legislature.

Last summer, she volunteered to be laid off so that another worker, who she believed needed the paycheck more keenly, could stay on the job – a selfless gesture her daughter didn’t learn about until after her mother died. (Amanda also found among her mother’s documents several denials of unemployment benefits – apparently things had gotten tight, but Michelle never told her kids about it.)

As the year of home isolation wore on, Michelle let her guard down. This spring, she started going out a bit more, even traveling with her brother and sister to Denver. Still, no one has figured out exactly how she caught the virus.

Amanda still wears a mask to most places, and it angers her to see so many people going barefaced, “fighting what the doctors said to do,” she said. “Everywhere I go now, I’m the only one in a mask. They don’t realize how fast it can take you.”

– – –

Cinnamon Jamila Key signed up for a vaccine as soon as Florida opened up eligibility to people 40 and over. She was 41, a mental health clinician and life coach who planned to go back to school and earn a doctorate in grief counseling with a Christian focus.

In early April, she got her first shot of the Moderna vaccine. But on April 8, she was diagnosed with covid. Whether she became infected before she got the dose or immediately after is not clear. Her mother remembers her complaining of a scratchy throat around when she got the shot.

Cinnamon had a long history of battling back from the edge. She had turned a crippling bout with depression – including two suicide attempts – into a career in mental wellness, focusing on Black and other underserved communities in her area of Miami-Dade County.

She was, her friends and family said, as warm and spicy as her name. She loved pencil skirts and six-inch heels and singing in the church choir at Second Baptist Church near her town of Homestead, south of Miami – leading the congregation in her trademark rendition of the stirring gospel song, “I’ve Got a Reason.”

Even after she fell ill, she took time early one morning – her voice weakened – to speak to her mother’s prayer chain about dealing with grief, said her mother, Betty Key.

“She wrote a book called ‘Crying is Allowed,’ so I think the first thing she would say is, ‘It’s OK . . . to feel what you feel when you feel it,’ ” Betty said.

Cinnamon’s resilience was evident from a young age. She had a business portfolio when she was 11, filling her grandfather’s old briefcase with her detailed drawings for a beauty emporium. After she flunked out of the University of South Florida, Cinnamon struggled through low-paying jobs and attempts to resume higher education.

In 2007, she was nearly done in by a mental health struggle.

“Imagine being diagnosed with clinical depression while you’re getting your degree in social work! Whew! And two failed suicide attempts. Yikes!” Cinnamon told a blogger last year. “It has been quite the journey. Not smooth, but I’m grateful for every inch of this road.”

Eventually, Cinnamon sought help and went on to earn bachelor’s and master’s degrees, spending 11 years as a social worker for Miami-Dade County Public Schools.

She had so many projects outside of her day job – a self-esteem course for young women, a podcast called “Naturally Cinnamon,” and a “Forever” brunch to help mothers and their adult daughters stave off rocky times – that last December, she finally took her side business full time.

Then, covid. As her illness worsened, Cinnamon’s parents – Wallace Key, a retired insurance claims manager, and Betty, a retired Miami-Dade schools administrator, both long vaccinated – drove from their home in South Carolina to be with their daughter.

On April 13, Cinnamon was hospitalized with breathing issues.

“She just didn’t get better and didn’t get better,” her mother recalled.

Doctors wanted to put her on a ventilator, but Cinnamon resisted, said her mother, who could see her daughter only through a window because of anti-infection rules.

On April 15, “my time for visitation was up and I had to leave,” Betty recalled. Usually, the two would blow kisses. That evening, Cinnamon could only wave bye-bye.

Not long after, Betty got a call from the doctor. She thought it would be about the intubation.

“She was gone,” the mother said. Cinnamon died of complications from covid 15 days after receiving her first vaccine dose.

Natalie Rowe, a longtime friend from church and an administrator at the clinic where Cinnamon got her first shot, initially put off getting the vaccine. Its development, she said, “was really quick for me.” Now, she said she hopes Cinnamon’s death will inspire other people of color to overcome their fears.

Cinnamon “tried so hard to do the right thing,” her mother said. “She wasn’t going out, and she wore her mask, and she had her gloves, and she got the vaccine as soon as she could.”

Betty said it’s hard for her to hear even good news about vaccines, though she still believes everyone should get the shot. “If a story comes on the news about the vaccine, I walk away,” she said. “I don’t want to hear the success stories. I don’t. Because my daughter is not one of them.”

– – –

Claudia Nodal was going into ninth grade at Miami Carol City Senior High in Miami Gardens, Fla., when Alexey Aguilar asked her to marry him.

“I said yes, of course,” Claudia recalled.

They wed two months after she graduated, in 1999. Since then, they had raised three daughters, built careers – he as a corrections officer, she as a third-grade teacher – and now they were planning a retirement close to the beach.

Claudia loves the ocean. Alexey wasn’t crazy about the beach, but, for her, he would move there.

They and their girls – Monica, 20, who is in college; Angelica, 17, just finishing high school; and Viviana, 15 – were looking forward to getting back to Walt Disney World. They bought passes every year and, pre-pandemic, drove up to Orlando at least once a month.

They were concerned about covid, especially because Alexey’s job in the mental health treatment center at Turner Guilford Knight Correctional Center in Miami put him among a vulnerable population.

“He would double mask, wear double gloves, he never even took off his jacket at work,” his wife said. “When he came home . . . nobody could talk to him or hug him until he took a shower.”

His yearly physical gave him a clean bill of health. But in March, Alexey – who emigrated from Honduras with his parents when he was 4 years old – caught the virus, probably at work, his wife said. He fell ill a month before Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, made vaccine doses available to people over 40.

At that point, Claudia and Alexey weren’t entirely on board with the vaccine.

“We weren’t going out, we felt like we could keep it under control a little longer,” Claudia said. “It’s a very new medication, and you don’t really know the side effects. . . . We’re not anti-vaccine, we believe in that stuff. But we thought we could wait, let the other people who need it more get it, the older people. I thought I had time.”

Alexey’s cough “got progressively worse,” his wife said. “He had such a bad coughing fit, his back muscles spasmed and he couldn’t breathe.” They called fire rescue; his vitals were OK. But two days later, the cough became so bad that Claudia made him go to the hospital.

Alexey’s stay stretched to nearly a month. Claudia could see that “he knew he might not come home. I think he was very afraid.” They spoke every day until he went on a respirator.

Jessica Herrera, Alexey’s co-worker and close friend, said he told her: “I don’t think I’m gonna make it, I think death is really trying to get me on this one.”

She assured him: “We’re both gonna be here in 30 years, we’ve got to see your daughters give birth, see the grandkids. But he knew.”

Alexey died April 23. He was 42.

Claudia and all three daughters tested positive for the coronavirus while Alexey was hospitalized, but their cases were mild. They got vaccinated soon after Alexey died.

“And oh my God, I wish it would have been available sooner,” Claudia said.

Alexey’s funeral drew more than 100 people, many of whom couldn’t get inside because of distancing rules. The service was on Facebook Live, but, she said, “a lot of people got left out.”

Now, as life around them edges back toward normal, the grieving seems harder.

“People are acting like it’s over,” Claudia said, “but it’s still with us. We still wear masks and take precautions. Sometimes we feel like we’re the weird ones for wearing masks. Covid is still here. And people are still dying.”

– – –

Charles Pryor, 79, waited for the call from his doctor’s office that would be the ticket to his family reunion.

He had a vaccine appointment in late March, but then the site in Medford, Ore., ran out of shots. Charles got a promise he’d be notified when more vaccine arrived.

The call didn’t come on time. On April 13, Charles began to feel the telltale symptoms: fatigue, low appetite, persistent cough. His wife fell ill two days later.

The elderly couple had spent much of the lockdown year cooped up in their southern Oregon home. Charles, a retired area manager for Arco gas stations, occupied himself with yard work. He and his wife organized their belongings, hoping eventually to downsize and live closer to their daughters, who are four hours away.

Their daughter Lynette Anderson hoped to surprise her parents for a Mother’s Day visit. She and her 16-year-old son, Trevin, would show off how much he’d grown since they last got together two years ago.

But on April 22, Charles collapsed at home and was hospitalized. Four days later, unable to visit in person, Lynette called her father and told him she loved him. To her surprise, her normally reticent father started asking about vaccines.

“Did Jeff get it?” he asked, referring to Lynette’s husband.

“Yes,” his daughter replied.

“Did Trevin?”

“Yes, his first one.”

Her father paused.

“Oh man, I wish I would have gotten it,” he said.

The next day, Charles went on a ventilator. Pneumonia scarred his lungs. His kidneys started to fail. He died on Mother’s Day.

The family reunion went on without him later that week in Canby, Ore., home to his other daughter, Christine Denison. They marked Christine’s 47th birthday with a small chocolate mousse cake and angels gifted by Lynette – a celebration overshadowed by grief.

No stranger to the pandemic’s toll, Lynette has three friends who lost loved ones to the virus. She can’t help but dwell on how close her father came to immunization. photo

“If only he just got it,” she said.

Now, she encourages others to get the shot – but gently. Vaccine skepticism and mistrust of government mandates run deep in her wine country community, which leans conservative. Rather than telling people what to do, she shares her own positive experience with getting vaccinated. And she tells her father’s story.

“When you talk about somebody passing, it really changes the mind,” she said. “Once you have it in your family, you realize it’s real.”

Lynette has already swayed her best friend’s daughter and hopes to win over others.

The family planned to bury Charles, a Navy veteran, at Eagle Point National Cemetery, near Medford, on June 11, but postponed the services because his widow still feels weak from her covid-19 illness.

“We all wanted to get together and have a family gathering,” Lynette said. “We went all those months and nobody got sick, and now we are going to have a funeral.”

– – –

Philip Sardelis was ecstatic to travel to Greece again this summer, a chance to take his aging mother back to her home country and celebrate his wife’s 45th birthday.

The co-founder of Sardi’s Chicken, a District of Columbia-area Peruvian restaurant chain, spent hours on the phone trying to land vaccine appointments for his mother and mother-in-law. He beamed after driving his mom back from her first shot in February. His own appointment was just around the corner, on March 26.

Eighteen days before Philip could receive a jab of immunity, before his restaurants could fully reopen, before he could revive his Greek vacation tradition, he tested positive for the virus.

He was 48, without serious medical conditions, so he wasn’t too worried. His fever spiked to 103, but he seemed to be getting better.

“The doctors said I’ll be OK, it’s not that bad,” he texted his cousin and business partner, also named Philip Sardelis, on March 9.

Less than 24 hours later, he couldn’t eat, couldn’t get up. The fever wouldn’t break.

“Dude I hate this,” he texted his cousin, who had recovered from his own bout with the virus in January. “I will fight through.”

On March 11, his wife, Lissette, drove him to Holy Cross Hospital in Silver Spring, Md., after an oximeter showed his oxygen levels dipping.

“im being told im in bad shape,” Philip wrote on Facebook on March 13. “I am not ready to leave this world yet but i need the power of everyones prayers.”

Raised by Greek immigrants in Aspen Hill in Montgomery County, Md., Philip attended Wheaton High School and Montgomery College. He dabbled in computers and worked for a title company before following his father into the food industry. He joined forces with his cousin Philip – both named for their grandfather, a Greek tradition – to operate a catering business.

The rotisserie chicken they catered from a Peruvian restaurant was a big hit, and the cousins opened their own place to sell the dish. From one store in Beltsville, Md., in 2008, their chain has grown to more than a dozen outlets.

“There’s something about these two Greek cousins: They take risks, they never think that they are going to fail,” said Lissette, a native of El Salvador.

At the hospital, Philip struggled to breathe. Other symptoms waned, but he developed blood clots in his lungs. Still, he managed to text his wife to make sure their teenage son drove his grandmother to her second vaccine appointment.

A week into his stay, Philip texted his cousin a selfie showing tubes in his nose. He said he looked like he had “one foot in the casket.”

He was intubated and transferred to Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, where he qualified for a last-resort treatment in which the patient’s blood is removed and run through an artificial lung to be enhanced with higher oxygen levels.

He couldn’t speak or move. He communicated by squeezing his wife’s hands. Lissette said doctors couldn’t say why he deteriorated so quickly. He was overweight but had no other common risk factors.

Deeply devoted to his four children, Philip now missed big achievements in their lives. His 12-year-old son, Georgie, won a wrestling tournament. Michael, 19, won admission to the University of Maryland.

On April 24, a doctor called Lissette and urged her to get to the hospital quickly. She hadn’t seen her husband in 10 days because of covid safety protocols. On her 45-minute drive, nurses called every 10 minutes.

By the time Lissette arrived with her sister and two oldest sons, doctors were performing CPR. Philip was already dead after a massive heart attack and kidney failure.

In the family’s close-knit Greek community, Philip’s funeral would have normally drawn a crowd of hundreds. His home would have teemed with visitors bringing food and condolences.

Big crowds were still out of the question, but Philip’s death came late enough in the pandemic that the Greek Orthodox Church allowed 100 people into the service, which was live-streamed on YouTube.

Lissette said she hopes her husband’s story pushes more people to get the shot. She can’t get over the feeling that his late death was so “unfair. But then again,” she said, “we are not special. Covid attacks anybody. It doesn’t matter who you are.”

She still hears people defend their decision not to get vaccinated by saying that they have more than a 90% chance of survival if infected.

“It doesn’t make me feel better that it’s only 2%, or 5%,” Lissette said. “The families like mine, we also matter. I can’t believe there are people that say that just because they don’t have anyone dead.”

The Washington Post’s Alice Crites contributed to this report.

A new election forecast gives Democrats hope for 2022

The Point – With Chris Cillizza

A new election forecast gives Democrats hope for 2022

(CNN) Conventional wisdom — and history — points to a disappointing 2022 at the ballot box for Democrats.

The first midterm election of a newly elected president is almost always bad news for their party in Congress. Republicans lost 40 seats in the House in 2018, while Democrats dropped 62 seats in 2010.
In fact, the president’s party has lost, on average, nearly 28 House seats and more than three Senate seats in the 19 midterm elections between 1946 and 2018.
Those numbers come courtesy of Emory University political science professor Alan Abramowitz, who came out with his first 2022 election forecast on Thursday.
And while history doesn’t look great for Democrats’ chances of holding onto their narrow majorities in the House and Senate, Abramowitz’s model suggest that all is not lost for the Party — by a long shot.
“A model using the generic ballot and seat exposure shows that a single digit lead on the generic ballot would give Democrats a good chance to keep control of the Senate,” he writes. “Given the expected impact of redistricting, however, Democrats probably need a larger lead to keep control of the House.”
Abramowitz’s model is primarily powered by two factors:
1) The generic ballot question. This Is a common question asked in national polls that usually goes along these lines: “If the election was today, would you vote for the Democratic or Republican candidate for House?” No names are used — hence “generic.” While the generic ballot is useless in predicting the outcome of any individual race, the question has generally served as a good indicator of what way the national winds are blowing — and which party is benefitting.
2) The raw number of seats both parties are defending. In Abramowitz’s model, he sets that at 222 Democratic House seats (out of 435) and 14 Senate seats (out of 34 up in 2022).
Depending then on which side has the edge in the generic ballot, Abramowitz’s model spits out a variety of outcomes.
The rosiest for Democrats (a 10-point lead in the generic ballot in the fall of 2022) would result in a gain of two seats for House Democrats and a three-seat pickup for Senate Democrats.
The worst scenario (a 10-point edge for Republicans in the generic ballot) would, according to the Abramowitz model, result in a 32-seat loss by Democrats in the House and a 1-seat loss in the Senate.
(Worth noting: A Quinnipiac University national poll in May gave Democrats a 9-point advantage in the generic ballot.)
“Despite their extremely narrow majorities, the forecasts … show that Democrats have a reasonable chance of keeping control of both chambers in the midterm elections if they maintain at least a narrow lead on the generic ballot,” concludes Abramowitz.
The Point: Next November is a loooong way off. But Abramowitz’s model provides a glimmer of hope for Democrats expecting doom and gloom in 2022.

Here’s Why Schumer’s Mostly OK With Manchin Blocking His Agenda

Here’s Why Schumer’s Mostly OK With Manchin Blocking His Agenda

Aaron P. Bernstein/Getty
Aaron P. Bernstein/Getty

 

Washington’s most popular parlor game, after a round of Kamala Harris is wrong no matter what she does, is guessing What in the world is Joe Manchin up to?

Manchin is now the man of the moment, with the fate of the Democratic agenda in his hands in a 50-50 Senate. He’s going about it in his wide-eyed, can’t-we-all-get-along way that his colleagues might find grating if it weren’t so sincere. Senators in his party who agree with him from afar on delicate issues like the For the People Act and maintaining the filibuster call him a heat shield. He told a confidant that after the shock of the Jan. 6 insurrection, he feared a civil war could break out between and within the parties. He wanted to create a safe space for warring sides and factions to talk it out.

Call him what you want—and many use unprintable epithets—he looks like the Pied Piper as reporters and other senators follow in his wake as he goes to cast another vote that will enrage someone. Eight Democrats voted against raising the minimum wage but Manchin and Arizona’s Kyrsten Sinema, a Green Party activist who’s tilted right since she ran for her seat in 2018, is generally inscrutable but something snapped in her that day. She flounced to the well in an exaggerated schoolgirl get up and what looked like a wig, gave a theatrical thumbs down, and flounced out seeming as happy to own the libs in that moment as Marjorie Taylor Greene is to taunt them every day.

The Democratic Senators Hiding Behind Joe Manchin

It’s messy up there. Manchin is generally at the center trying to calm things down but often stirs them up. He said it was the GOP’s duty to vote for a commission to find out what happened on Jan. 6, insisting “You have to have faith there’s ten good people.”

No, you don’t when those ten good people in the Republican Party don’t show up even though the commission in question had already been watered down to a thin gruel with equal power between the parties and a hard stop on Dec. 31, no matter what. Republicans who believe subpoenas are mere invitations to show up would only have to stonewall for a few months before claiming to have exonerated the ex-president who demands it. Delay is their friend. Former White House Don McGahn finally came to Congress last week to give limited testimony on his own terms behind closed doors, four years after being ordered to do so and long after Ship Mueller set sail.

After bipartisanship failed in such an easy instance, surely Manchin would have realized he’s naive to believe anyone’s going to buy his belief in bipartisanship. Not at all. Afterward, he said he’s not “willing to destroy our government” by ending the filibuster over it.

No one benefits from Manchin’s belief that there’s a pony in the manure McConnell is shoveling more than Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. As long as Manchin is so publicly standing in the way of so much, Schumer can go home, have AOC stand on the podium next to him, and not get hit too hard by progressives for what he’s not getting done. Schumer’s up in 2022. AOC hasn’t said she’s going to primary him but she also hasn’t said she won’t, so keeping her close is in order. Manchin taking the hits also protects Schumer’s other members running in 2022, like Arizona’s Mark Kelly, New Hampshire’s Maggie Hassan, New Hampshire’s Jeanne Shaheen.

Joe Manchin: Deeply Disappointed in GOP and Prepared to Do Absolutely Nothing

It’s unlikely any Democrat other than Manchin could win statewide in an increasingly Trumpian state. Trump won West Virginia by 39 points last year; as the Times noted; no other member of the House or Senate represents voters who favored the other party’s presidential candidate by more than 16 points. In 2018, two years after Trump won the state by 32 points, Manchin won a second term by just three points.

And for all his faith in Republicans now, it’s not true that the Democrat from West Virginia might as well be a Republican, as Joe Biden said this month when he said the reason he couldn’t get Democrats’ voting rights bill through was “two members of the Senate”—meaning Manchin and Sinema, “who vote more with my Republican friends.”

In fact, Manchin voted consistently against repeal of Obamacare and for Medicare for All, to preserve funding for Planned Parenthood, against Trump’s tax cuts (and for his impeachment), and periodically reintroduces a gun control bill he co-sponsored with Sen. Pat Toomey. He’s no longer high on S.1, the bloated For the People Act, but he wants to fatten and pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Act.

Still, I threw up my hands and said that’s it when Manchin stuck with the filibuster after losing the Jan. 6 commission vote. Didn’t he hear Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell say he is “100 percent focused “on stopping President Joe Biden’s socialist administration? Imagine what he’d say about a Democratic president he hasn’t been friends with for decades. Then I read something Manchin wrote when he took a hard vote last year against the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett.

He warned that Republicans had chosen “a dangerous, partisan path” to cram Barrett onto the court an unprecedented eight days before an election. “The Senate is supposed to be the greatest deliberative body in the world… But each time a Senate majority–regardless of party–changes the rules, we reduce the incentive to work together across party lines” and “fan the flames of division.”

He’s applying that to his party now. And on Thursday it worked. The infrastructure bill that had appeared to be dead on Wednesday came back to life after hours and hours of Manchin talking it out in his safe place along with—you guessed it—a bipartisan group of 10 senators.

I still fear the country is paralyzed until the filibuster ends or McConnell’s obstruction does. Otherwise, an election has no consequences. But I no longer feel Manchin is wrong to play by the rules as they exist. He’s put his own seat on the line as collateral and so that others might survive. I’m sure he’s hoping for a pony to come out of it. I’m hoping too.