Blog

  • GOP-run districts get 85% of the benefit of climate law. Some still hate it.

    GOP-run districts get 85% of the benefit of climate law. Some still hate it.

    Ajulo Othow started solar and storage company EnerWealth Solutions seven years ago to get small solar projects on farmland and other places in rural communities in the Southeast where money is tight and the phrase “green economy” is rarely spoken.

    In just the last year, Othow said the amount of solar her company has developed went from 2 megawatts of power to 25 — an increase of 1,150 percent because of the Inflation Reduction Act, the massive climate and economic development law enacted in 2022.

    “What the Inflation Reduction Act allows us now to do is for everyday people to start to take advantage of this technology,” said Othow, a longtime lawyer in North Carolina’s solar industry and the president of Black Owners of Solar Services.

    The IRA is the Biden Administration’s signature climate law. The historic act is the most aggressive climate policy in U.S. history, rolling out billions in tax breaks and other incentives with the goal of cutting economy-wide carbon emissions 40 percent by 2030.

    Every congressional Republican voted against the bill, arguing it was nothing more than handouts to prop up climate and social justice programs. Some on the extreme right continue to argue that climate change is a hoax. But now some GOP House members who voted against the IRA are urging their leader to consider saving key portions of it.

    Open dirt field with business sign for Arizona Hydrogen stuck in ground
    The future site of the Arizona Hydrogen facility located in Buckeye, about 40 miles southwest of Phoenix. Urias Communications

    IRA creates ‘economic revolution’

    In fact, it is the red states that overwhelmingly have benefitted from the federal government’s infusion of clean energy money, according to a report released this month by E2, a national nonpartisan group of more than 10,000 business leaders that advocates for a cleaner economy and environment.

    Friday marks two years since Biden inked his signature on the IRA. Companies have announced roughly 330 clean energy and vehicle projects since that time, efforts that could create 109,278 jobs and bring in a whopping $126 billion in private investments, if completed, according to the E2 report.

    E2’s report breaks down IRA-boosted projects by state, sector and industry as well as by congressional district. It found that “nearly 60 percent of the announced projects — representing 85 percent of the investments and 68 percent of the jobs — are in Republican congressional districts.”

    Although Ohio Rep. Marcy Kaptur, a Democrat, boasts the largest number of projects — eight — in her district, the next seven congressional districts with the most IRA-subsidized projects are all represented by Republicans — in Georgia, the Carolinas, Nevada and Oklahoma.

    “This is what I truly believe is the biggest economic revolution that this country has seen in generations, and it’s because we finally, finally, finally in this country decided to do something about climate change and clean energy,” said Bob Keefe, executive director of E2, during an hour-long online presentation with reporters.

    Red state projects proliferate

    Among the major projects is the South Korea-based solar manufacturer QCells. Last year it announced a $2.5 billion expansion in Dalton, Georgia, spurring more than 2,500 jobs and helping change a town known as the “carpet capital of the world” into a destination for clean energy manufacturing.

    Since 2022, the northern third of Nevada has added more than 5,000 jobs from a $6.6 billion investment in projects such as the Rhyolite Ridge and Thacker Pass lithium mines as the state aims toward becoming the lithium capital of the United States.

    Map of US showing GOP state's benefit from climate laws
    Clean Economy Works: Inflation Reduction Act Two-Year Analysis, Aug. 4, 2024, E2 Lee Pedinoff / Floodlight

    And in North Carolina, $19.7 billion has been poured into the state, creating 22 clean energy projects and more than 10,000 jobs in solar, recycling, electric vehicle and battery manufacturing. The investments include a $13.9 billion Toyota Motor North America EV/hybrid battery plant slated to open next year.

    E2’s report is based on publicly available information, including news releases and formal government announcements. Roughly one-third of the information did not include how much money was being invested or how many jobs a project was expected to create, E2 stated.

    In other words, the impact of the IRA is likely broader than the nonprofit’s tally. That bodes well for environmentalists and clean energy advocates.

    Indeed, the QCells project is in the district that is home to the highly vocal GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a climate denier and a fierce supporter of former President Donald Trump as he vies for a second term. Nevada U.S. Rep. Mark Amodei aligns himself with MAGA Republicans, who have pushed for more fossil fuel production in the United States — not less.

    NC lawmakers block change

    North Carolina is headed by a Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper, whose executive order on climate change strives to cut CO2 emissions 40 percent from 2005 levels by next year. But its majority GOP-legislature and congressional delegation frequently rail against clean energy policies.

    Cooper was successful in getting the legislature to pass a sweeping energy bill that he signed into law in 2021, three years after his executive order on climate change. In turn, the state legislature has been using the state budget to whittle away at environmental protections or shape energy policy.

    In 2023, lawmakers added a provision preventing North Carolina from joining a cap-and-trade program — such as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative — to limit power plant emissions.

    That GOP-led states are bearing the most fruit from the IRA is not surprising. Many, like those in the Midwest and Southeast, are home to major manufacturing operations, such as automakers, which are moving towards an all-hybrid or electric product in the coming decade.

    Climate law benefits GOP districts aerial view of the Toyota factory in North Carolina
    North Carolina officials say the Inflation Reduction Act, which includes hefty tax incentives to buy electric vehicles, have helped propel North Carolina to one of the top states in electric vehicle investment. Courtesy of Toyota

    This means while the conservative politicians may scoff at dollars to clean the environment, spending that spurs new or expanding businesses and jobs catches their eye.

    Georgia is one of five states that boast 20 or more projects stemming from IRA investments. One of Nevada’s congressional districts has among the highest number of IRA-created jobs. And North Carolina’s multi-billion dollar investment is the highest among the 50 states.

    The Toyota Battery Manufacturing North Carolina in Liberty is now valued at $13.9 billion. A company spokesman said the IRA helped but wasn’t the lynchpin in Toyota’s decision to expand the scope of the project, which is scheduled to start churning out batteries for EVs and hybrids next year.

    “Incentives can be helpful but are often temporary or subject to changing political dynamics. As a result, Toyota makes long-term investment decisions based on the market, not incentive opportunities,” Eric Booth said in a statement emailed to Floodlight.

    Some Republicans rethinking opposition to IRA

    In fact, 18 congressional Republicans signed a letter to GOP House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana urging him to be cautious in repealing all or parts of the IRA — something Trump has vowed to do if he is again elected president.

    “Energy tax credits have spurred innovation, incentivized investment and created good jobs in many parts of the country — including many districts represented by members of our conference,” the Aug. 6 letter to Johnson said.

    The Congress members said they had heard from industry and constituents that clawing back previously issued energy tax credits, especially on projects that already broke ground, would undermine private investments and stop development.

    “A full repeal would create a worst-case scenario where we would have spent billions of taxpayer dollars and received next to nothing in return,” the letter states.

    There has been a noticeable dropoff in the number of projects, jobs and money invested during the second year of the IRA compared with the first. Keefe chalks that up to, in part, the coming election.

    “We know that anytime there’s an election year, there’s going to be uncertainty over policy,” he said.

    Keefe warned that if the IRA gets rolled back, “It’s not, you know, tree huggers and environmentalists in San Francisco or New York that are going to get hurt. It’s working class people in Georgia, Michigan and North Carolina, Ohio that are going to get hurt because that’s where these these projects are going.”

  • After conservative criticism, Trump said he is a “no” on Florida’s abortion rights ballot measure

    After conservative criticism, Trump said he is a “no” on Florida’s abortion rights ballot measure

    After criticizing Florida’s six-week abortion ban on Thursday, former President Donald Trump, a resident of the Sunshine State, told Fox News that he will be voting against a ballot measure to protect and expand abortion rights. 

    “I disagreed with that right from the early primaries when I heard about it,” Trump said Friday of the state’s six-week ban. “I disagreed with it.” 

    Trump then made additional comments centering on an untrue point about abortions, arguing that some states allow for abortions after birth. There is no such thing as abortion after birth, and no state law allows for it. The Florida measure would allow for restrictions after fetal viability, which occurs typically between 23 and 25 weeks of pregnancy. 

    The Florida measure would amend the state’s constitution to protect abortion rights until viability — the same standard as Roe v. Wade — and would as a result overturn the state’s active six-week ban. The measure requires 60 percent voter approval to pass. 

    During an interview on Thursday, Trump said the six-week ban offered too little time — leading some to believe he might vote in favor of the abortion rights measure, though his campaign quickly said otherwise. He also said he would require the government or insurance companies to pay for IVF treatment, though he did not say how. These remarks incensed some anti-abortion leaders, who have been his staunch allies since his first presidential campaign in 2016. This year, as the GOP presidential nominee, Trump has sought to soften his stance on abortion — taking credit for the overturn of Roe, but declining to endorse a national ban on the procedure. 

    Most women voters still disapprove of Trump’s favored position, which is to leave abortion policy up to states. Instead, they support a national abortion rights protection, per polling from the nonprofit health policy research and journalism organization KFF.

    The Republican Party endorsed a platform at its national convention that would interpret the U.S. Constitution’s 14th amendment to grant embryos the same legal status as people — an anti-abortion ideology known as “fetal personhood,” which could be used to ban abortion and other reproductive health services like in vitro fertilization. Trump’s campaign website links to the party platform. 

    Trump’s new IVF pledge would require congressional approval, which is unlikely, and would run against the position of many in his own party. All but two Senate Republicans voted against a Democrat-backed bill in June meant to protect access to the treatment. 

    Some evangelical leaders and abortion opponents have said they will not be endorsing Trump because of his recent efforts to distance himself from the movement. Meanwhile, other prominent anti-abortion activists, such as Students for Life leader Kristan Hawkins, have argued they stand a better chance of restricting abortion under a Trump administration than one led by Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee.  

    Trump’s latest comments drew praise from abortion opponents. 

    “We thank President Trump for shedding light on how extreme this measure is and call on all Republican leaders in Florida to follow the president’s example,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of SBA Pro-Life America. 

    In a series of posts on the social media website X, Hawkins suggested Trump’s announcement shows abortion opponents will have better luck influencing a Republican White House.

    “The last 24 hours the pro-life movement united calling on President Trump to do the right thing,” she posted, then inaccurately describing the Florida measure as one that would protect abortion in all trimesters. “It worked. He listened. He’s voting NO.”

    Harris issued a statement shortly after the news about Trump’s “no” vote broke on Friday.

    “Donald Trump just made his position on abortion very clear: He will vote to uphold an abortion ban so extreme it applies before many women even know they are pregnant,” she said. “Trump proudly brags about the role that he played in overturning Roe v. Wade and said there should be punishment for women who have an abortion.” 

  • Trump Supporters Define Woke

    Trump Supporters Define Woke

    When Trump supporters are asked to define what woke actually means, they are left stumped and spiraling. Walter Masterson breaks it down on Rebel HQ.

    Follow Walter on: YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, TikTok

    Be a driving force for change by supporting our work on RebelHQ

  • “In God, we trust”: A divine dilemma when government and faith go head-to-head

    “In God, we trust”: A divine dilemma when government and faith go head-to-head

    Imagine trying to sit through an office meeting where someone insists on quoting Shakespeare before every agenda item—no, not the cool lines from Hamlet, but the more obscure, less relevant ones. You’d probably wonder why anyone would cling so desperately to a 16th-century playwright’s words in a world of modern communication tools. Now, swap out Shakespeare with references to God in our government, and you’ve got the modern conundrum of church and state.

    Is the Almighty on our payroll?

    It’s 2024, and yet “In God we trust” still adorns our currency, and “one nation under God” is etched into our Pledge of Allegiance. These are remnants of a time when the line between church and state was as blurred as the vision of someone accidentally grabbing the wrong pair of glasses. But let’s face it: Not everyone in this melting pot of cultures and beliefs shares the same faith—or any faith at all. So, should Uncle Sam still be flaunting God like an outdated celebrity endorsement?

    Stained glass window of a church with $ symbols on it

    The numbers don’t lie (but they sure do complicate things)

    According to a 2021 Pew Research Center survey, the percentage of Americans identifying as Christians has dropped from 75% in 2011 to 63% in 2021. Meanwhile, the “nones” (those identifying as atheists, agnostics, or nothing in particular) have risen to nearly 30%. This shift in religious identity raises the question: Why is our government still clinging to a one-size-fits-all faith model that increasingly doesn’t fit?

    Further, a 2022 Gallup poll showed that only 81% of Americans now believe in God, down from 92% in 2011. Yet, the government continues to invoke God’s name like a Hail Mary pass in a political football game. The issue isn’t just about faith; it’s about representation. Are we, as a society, okay with the government playing favorites with religion when a growing chunk of the population is looking for a more secular playing field?

    When faith becomes a ‘PR’ problem

    Students reciting the pledge if allegiance in a classroom.
    Photo credit: Luke Wood

    The reality is that government endorsement of religion—or its appearance—sends a message. It suggests that there is a “right” belief system endorsed by the state, leaving those who fall outside of that system feeling like the odd ones out at a family reunion. It’s like the government is trying to be the cool parent who wants to be friends with everyone but keeps playing the same old tune on the jukebox.

    Nowhere is this tension more evident than in our schools during the morning Pledge of Allegiance. The words “under God” have been controversial since they were added in 1954. For students from diverse religious backgrounds—or those who identify as non-religious—this daily ritual can feel like an imposition of a belief system they don’t subscribe to. For some, it’s a minor inconvenience; for others, it’s a daily reminder that their beliefs—or lack thereof—aren’t quite “American” enough.

    Balancing tradition and inclusion

    Advocates for keeping religious references in government symbols argue that these traditions are integral to the nation’s identity. They believe these references serve as a reminder of the values upon which the country was founded. Some see the phrase “In God we trust” on currency and “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance as unifying forces, providing common ground in an increasingly divided society.

    On the flip side, the inclusion of God in government symbols and pledges can alienate those who don’t share the same religious beliefs. As the number of Americans identifying as non-religious grows, so too does the number of people who feel excluded by these references. In a country that prides itself on freedom of religion—or freedom from religion—should the government really be endorsing a particular religious viewpoint?

    Government and faith: A sign that says Keep State and Church separate

    Kennedy v. Bremerton School District

    One recent case underscoring these tensions is Kennedy v. Bremerton School District (2022). This case involved a high school football coach dismissed for praying on the field after games. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the coach, holding that his prayer was protected under the First Amendment’s Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses. The case reflects the delicate balance between allowing individual religious expression and maintaining the secular nature of public institutions like schools. It shows how the line between personal faith and public endorsement of religion can become blurred, leading to complex legal and social challenges.

    Rebranding for the modern age

    So, should the government support the separation of church and state by removing references to God? It’s a question worth pondering. As society evolves, it’s time to rebrand and update the government’s messaging to reflect the reality of the 21st century. It’s not about turning away from faith; it’s about shifting toward a future where everyone can feel like they belong regardless of their beliefs.

    In the end, the government’s job isn’t to save our souls—it’s to serve its citizens. All of them. And that, my friends, is the gospel truth.

    Because, in the words of a wise man (well, it’s ‘yours truly’)- “If God wanted His name on our money, He’d have opened a bank.” 

  • Pennsylvania Court Rules That Mail ballots can’t be rejected over improper date on envelope

    Pennsylvania Court Rules That Mail ballots can’t be rejected over improper date on envelope

    Zany: I am happy to hear that the court ruled against yet another Republican “rule” meant to provide them with an excuse to throw out mail-in ballots. Forgetting to date the outside of the ballot envelope, or using the wrong date, even though the signature is there is just nitpicking. I wonder how closely they would follow this rule in pure red counties? I might be jaded, but I have a feeling they wouldn’t be too concerned about a missing date on the outer envelope of a vote for the GOP.

    Come on. The actual ballot is inside a secrecy envelope which is inside the mail-in ballot envelope. If the ballot is for a 2024 election and the date on the outer envelope is 2023, are you telling me that the 2024 ballot is now invalid? Why? Because the voter somehow cheated and gained access to an advanced copy of a 2024 ballot back in 2023, mailed it in a year ahead, but it somehow didn’t arrive until election day 2024, so they obviously cheated? Don’t you think someone that devious would be smart enough to write 2024 on the envelope?

    And don’t get me started on a properly filled-in ballot inside a secrecy envelope, inside the mail-in envelope with a verified signature, but no date. So it gets tossed out? The date nonsense has been going on for awhile here in Pennsylvania, so I’m happy about this ruling.

    Votebeat is a nonprofit news organization reporting on voting access and election administration across the U.S. Sign up for our free newsletters here.

    Not counting a voter’s mail ballot because they failed to properly date the return envelope violates their rights under the state constitution, a Pennsylvania appellate court ruled Friday.

    Republicans said they would immediately appeal the ruling to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. But if the decision stands, it could affect thousands of ballots and influence the outcome of close races.

    The five-judge Commonwealth Court panel split 4-1 on the decision.

    “The refusal to count undated or incorrectly dated but timely mail ballots submitted by otherwise eligible voters because of meaningless and inconsequential paperwork errors violates the fundamental right to vote recognized in the free and equal elections clause,” Judge Ellen Ceisler wrote for the majority, referring to a provision in the state constitution.

    The case, brought by a coalition of civil rights groups represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania among others, is the latest of several challenges to the dating requirement since the state implemented its mail voting law, Act 77, in 2020.

    Act 77 required voters to sign and date the outer return envelope of their mail ballots, and return the ballot in a secrecy envelope, in order for them to be counted.

    Federal judges have gone back and forth over whether enforcing the requirement violated federal voting law. The current case is the first to directly challenge this requirement under the state constitution.

    Lawyers for the plaintiffs hailed the ruling. “This decision has strengthened the right to vote in Pennsylvania,” said Brent Landau, executive director of Public Interest Law Center, one of the groups that sued to challenge the requirement. “Mail ballots will no longer be rejected because of a meaningless requirement to fill out a date that isn’t used for anything.”

    The suit named two of the state’s largest counties and the Pennsylvania Department of State as defendants. The department declined to defend the requirement in court and called the ruling a “victory.”

    The Pennsylvania GOP and the Republican National Committee both intervened in the case to defend the requirement. In a statement, Claire Zunk, a spokesperson for the Republican National Committee, said the decision is “an example of the worst kind of judicial activism” and that the RNC would appeal the ruling “immediately.”

    “Courts should not undermine election confidence and integrity by striking down commonsense election laws enacted by the people’s representatives,” she said.

    Adam Bonin, a Philadelphia-based Democratic election lawyer, who was not part of this case but has been involved in other lawsuits challenging the dating requirement, said the ruling should apply statewide, even though only the Department of State and Philadelphia and Allegheny counties were sued.

    During oral arguments earlier this month, a lawyer for the ACLU argued that if the state could not show a compelling interest for the date requirement, then the free and equal elections clause in the state constitution would bar officials from using the rule to reject ballots.

    In the ruling, Ceisler highlighted the determination in previous cases that the date “is not used to determine the timeliness of a ballot, a voter’s qualifications/eligibility to vote, or fraud.”

    “Therefore, the dating provisions serve no compelling government interest,” she wrote.

    The state and national Republican parties had argued that the date could be helpful in detecting fraud, or could serve as a backup option for determining the receipt date of a ballot if electronic systems were to fail. They also asserted that, should the judges find the dating requirement invalid, all of Act 77 would have to be struck down, based on the way the law is worded.

    But the majority disagreed, saying plaintiffs sought only “a declaration that enforcement of the dating provisions in a manner that excludes undated and incorrectly dated” ballots was unconstitutional.

    In a statement, the Pennsylvania Department of State said the decision was a victory for voting rights.

    “Multiple court cases have now confirmed that the dating of a mail-in ballot envelope, when election officials can already confirm it was sent and received within the legal voting window, provides no purpose to election administration,” the statement said. “This ruling makes clear a voter’s minor error of forgetting to date or misdating a ballot envelope cannot be a cause for disenfranchisement. Our Administration will always uphold Pennsylvanians’ right to vote and is pleased with today’s ruling.”

    Gov. Josh Shapiro, a Democrat, tweeted that the court “got it right.”

    Added by Zany editor

    The judge who dissented, Patricia McCullough argued that the dating requirement “falls squarely” within the legislature’s authority to establish voting rules, and wrote that the majority ignored “more than a century” of state Supreme Court precedent on the free and equal clause of the state constitution.

    The ruling could have a wide impact this November.

    During the April primary, counties rejected roughly 8,500 ballots, or 1.22% of those returned, for failing to meet one or more of these standards, according to an analysis of Pennsylvania Department of State data. More than 4,400 of those were rejected for dating issues.

    But those numbers are expected to be higher this fall, as more voters will turn out to vote in the presidential election and opt to cast their ballots by mail.

    “If there was any real justification to this, we’d be in a different boat, but there isn’t,” Bonin said. “This is what the framers of the Pennsylvania Constitution meant by the free and equal elections clause.”

    Carter Walker is a reporter for Votebeat in partnership with Spotlight PA. Contact Carter at cwalker@votebeat.org.

  • Governments often struggle with massive new IT projects

    Governments often struggle with massive new IT projects

    Idaho’s state government was facing a problem.

    In 2018, its 86 state agencies were operating with a mix of outdated, mismatched business systems that ran internal processes like payroll and human resources. Some of the programs dated back to the 1980s, and many were written in programming languages they don’t teach in engineering schools anymore.

    The state made a clear choice — one many other state and city governments have made in recent years — they overhauled their entire IT suite with one cloud-based software.

    But since the $121 million project, called Luma, rolled out in July 2023, things have not gone as planned.

    Luma has created procedural and data errors and caused “disruptions in day-to-day processes and [is] impacting overall productivity,” said an audit that was provided to legislators in June.

    Five months into its launch last year, the Luma project was still receiving criticism from employees, organizations that work with the state’s government agencies and from top state legislators.

    Speaker of the Idaho House of Representatives Mike Moyle said in a November 2023 Legislative Council meeting that the state might want to come up with an exit plan for the platform — “No offense, this thing is a joke and it’s not working,” he told legislators.

    Idaho’s Luma project is just one of many government IT overhauls that hasn’t gone as smoothly as city and state officials may have aimed for.

    As few as 13% of large government IT projects succeed, a field guide by the U.S. General Services Administration’s 18F team said. The group of designers, software engineers, strategists and product managers work within the GSA to help government agencies buy and build tech products.

    State projects, the org’s report says, can face the most challenges because state departments often don’t have sufficient knowledge about modern software development and their procurement procedures can be outdated for what’s needed to properly vet huge software solutions.

    “Every year, the federal government matches billions of dollars in funding to state and local governments to maintain and modernize IT systems used to implement federal programs such as Medicaid, child welfare benefits, housing, and unemployment insurance,” 18F’s State Software Budgeting Handbook said. “Efforts to modernize those legacy systems fail at an alarmingly high rate and at great cost to the federal budget.”

    Why are governments overhauling long-standing IT systems?

    Most of the time, as in the case of Idaho, a state is seeking to overhaul a series of aging, inflexible and ineffective systems with one more modernized approach.

    Each year, governments need to budget and allocate resources to maintain existing systems and to get them to work with other business operation systems. In 2019, 80% of the $90 billion federal IT spending budget went toward maintenance of legacy software.

    Giant projects, like Washington state’s proposed $465 million replacement program of its legacy systems, may likely be replacing the millions spent every year to keep up old systems.

    Aging software systems aren’t just awkward or inefficient to use, but they can also pose cybersecurity risks. Departments that use systems built with older programming languages that are going out of style will struggle to find employees who can maintain them, experts say. Departments might also struggle to get newer business systems to integrate with older ones, which causes the potential for hiccups in operation.

    A closer look at Luma

    Idaho’s State Controller’s Office found itself in that position six years ago when it sought to overhaul all its business operation systems. Scott Smith, the chief deputy controller, and project manager of Luma, said they were trying to maintain systems that they were losing technical support for.

    Each agency had built their own homegrown system, or had procured their own up until that point. There was a desire to modernize operations statewide and do an audit on return on investment for taxpayers. The project got the name Luma, an attempt for the state to “enlighten, or shine a light on” its existing systems and update them, Smith said.

    After a procurement process, the state chose enterprise resource planning software company Infor, and replaced a collection of separate systems that ran payroll, budgets, financial management and human resources with one cloud-based solution. Many of these legacy systems dated back to 1987 and 1988, and were becoming vulnerable to security threats, Smith said.

    Reports by the Idaho Capital Sun found that since its rollout last summer, the new system didn’t correctly distribute $100 million in interest payments to state agencies, it double paid more than $32 million in Idaho Department of Health and Welfare payments, and it created payroll issues or delays for state employees. A nonprofit that works with the state said it wasn’t paid for months, and only received payments when they sought attention from state legislators and local media, and upon launch day in July 2023, only about 50% of employees had completed basic training on the system.

    In February, Moyle and a bipartisan group of eight legislators asked an independent, nonpartisan state watchdog agency called the Office of Performance Evaluations to look into Luma’s software. And in June, a Legislative Services Audit found system lacked a range of information technology controls for data validation and security.

    The performance evaluation report isn’t due until October, but Ryan Langrill, interim director of the OPE, said in August that they were told to make the Luma study its priority.

    “Our goal is to identify what went well and what didn’t and to offer recommendations for future large scale IT projects,” Langrill said.

    Smith told States Newsroom that with any large-scale IT project, there’s always going to be difficulties during the first year of implementation. Idaho is the first to do a rollout of this kind, where all business processes went live at once in a multi-cloud environment, he said.

    They developed requirements for the system for several years before its rollout last year and spent time in system integration testing with experts from Infor.

    “Once you put it into the real world, right? There’s still a lot for you to understand,” Smith said. “And while the system itself can provide you the functionality, there’s still a lot of inherent business processes that need to be adapted to the new system.”

    Each agency had to evaluate their own internal processes, Smith said. Large-scale departments like military, transportation and health and human services are going to operate differently than smaller ones like libraries and the historical society. Trying to provide a singular system to support each facet of government is going to come with its challenges, he said.

    Human error has also likely played a role in the rollout, Smith said. As employees have to learn the new system and make changes to years-long processes, they’ll have to take time to change, adjust, refine and improve.

    Smith said he hopes the Office of Performance Evaluations looks at the Luma project with a “holistic” approach, going back to source selections and analyzing what could have been done better with everything from implementation to the development of requirements for the technology.

    “We’ll obviously look at those results and see where we can make improvements, but it can also be used, I hope, as a source document for others…” Smith said. “Every state’s going through a system modernization effort, that they can use to help improve their potential for success in their projects.”

    Other challenging rollouts

    A similar situation is brewing in Maine with the rollout of its child welfare system, called Katahdin — named after a mountain in Baxter State Park.

    The state sought to overhaul its child welfare database used by the Office of Child and Family Services back in 2019 when its older system began losing functionality, the Maine Morning Star reported. It aimed to “modernize and improve” technical support for staff that work with families, and the department received eight proposals from software companies in 2021, but only three met eligibility criteria.

    The state ultimately chose Deloitte, and spent nearly $30 million on the project, which went live in January 2022. But employees say their workflow hasn’t been as effective since.

    Caseworkers have described it as cumbersome, saying they need to use dozens of steps and duplicative actions just to complete a single task, and that files saved in the system later go missing. It’s additional stress on a department that faces staff vacancies and long waitlists to connect families with resources, the Maine Morning Star reported in March.

    In her annual report in 2023, Christine Alberi, the state’s child welfare ombudsman, wrote “Katahdin is negatively affecting the ability of child welfare staff to effectively do their work, and therefore keep children safe.”

    Katahdin, too, received recommendations from a bipartisan oversight committee to improve the system earlier this year. Recommendations included factors beyond just the software, like improvements to the court system, recruiting more staff and addressing burnout.

    States Newsroom sought to determine if any of the recommendations had been implemented, and to confirm that the department was still using Katahdin, but the department did not return a request for comment.

    A fall 2023 report shows that California has also struggled with the maintenance of its statewide financial system that performs budgeting, procurement, cash management and accounting functions. The program, called FI$Cal, has cost about $1 billion since it began in 2005, and last fall State Auditor Grant Parks said that despite two decades of effort, “many state entities have historically struggled to use the system to submit timely data for the [Annual Comprehensive Financial Report].”

    The state, which is famously home to tech capital Silicon Valley, has its own department of technology, which oversees the strategic vision and planning of the state’s tech strategy. But the department landed on the Auditor’s “high risk” list in 2023, with Parks saying the department has not made sufficient progress on its tech projects.

    Government v. Corporate tech rollouts

    When a government rolls out a new software system, two things are happening, says Mark Wheeler, former chief information officer of the City of Philadelphia. First, they’re replacing a system that’s been around for decades, and second, they’re introducing workers to technology that they may see in their private lives, but aren’t used to operating in a government setting.

    Sometimes, he said, governments spend a lot of time planning for the day a system goes live, but don’t think about the long learning curve afterward. They spend years defining functionality and phases of a product, but they don’t designate the real resources needed for “change management,” or the capacity for teams to engage with technologists and become a part of the transition to using the new technology.

    Wheeler suggests that departments train new hires in advance of a rollout so certain people can fully focus on the technology transition. Learning these new technologies and building new internal processes can become “a full time job” of its own, Wheeler said. The people who are touch-points for their department with the new systems will also need to form relationships with the software companies they’ve chosen to ease the transition.

    Huge software rollouts call follow either an “agile” or “waterfall” approach — agile focuses on continuous releases that incorporate customer feedback, while waterfall has a clearly defined series of phases, and one phase must reach completion before others start.

    “We get this message over and over again that government needs to operate like a business, and therefore all of our major technology transformations need to operate in this agile format,” Wheeler said. “Well, if you don’t properly train people and introduce them to agile and create the capacity for them to engage in those two week sprints, that whole agile process starts to fall apart.”

    Another way these tech transformations differ between private and public sectors is that there are often project managers at private corporations who oversee the many facets of a project and “own” it from start to finish. Between constant iteration on its improvement, thinking about its long term health, the care and growth of a project, Wheeler says, corporations tend to invest in more people to see transitions through.

    Wheeler acknowledged that it can be frustrating for residents to see huge budgets dedicated to government projects that take time to come to fruition and to work smoothly. But his main advice to state or city governments that are on the precipice of a huge change is to invest in the change management teams. When a government is spending potentially hundreds of millions of dollars on a new solution, the tiny budget line of some additional personnel can make or break the success of a project.

    And finally, Wheeler says, governments and residents should keep in mind the differing expectations and priorities, between private and public sectors when comparing them.

    Tech transformations at large companies are mostly about meeting a bottom line and return on investment, while governments are responsible for the health and safety and stability of their societies. They also require the feedback and inclusion of many, many stakeholders and due process procedures, Wheeler said, and they have to be transparent about their decision-making.

    Governments also just aren’t known to be super great with change, he said.

    “As much as the public says they want government to move quickly, when you propose a very big change, suddenly everyone wants to question it and make sure that they have their say in the process,” Wheeler said. “And that includes technology pieces so that will slow it all down.”

  • Recount requested by Ottawa Impact member confirms he lost his GOP primary

    Recount requested by Ottawa Impact member confirms he lost his GOP primary

    A recount Thursday reaffirmed the outcome of an Ottawa County Commission district’s results from the August primary. 

    Ottawa County Commissioner Roger Belknap filed a request with the Ottawa County Clerk’s Office on Aug. 19 that asserted he believed “fraud or errors were committed” by precinct election inspectors during the voting process.

    Belknap, who successfully unseated former District 9 Commissioner Phil Kuyers in 2022 by just 307 votes, this time lost a rematch against Kuyers in the 2024 Republican primary by more than 1,000 votes (4,070-2,997).

    Belknap said his reason for requesting the recount was that he suspected erroneous results.

    “My petition for recount is based upon two factors,” Belknap wrote in the complaint. “Reported results indicating my campaign received more votes than my opponent have been sent to me (screen shots) with all precincts being reported in local media.”

    Belknap was referencing Grand Rapids-based television station WZZM-13’s incorrect reporting the night of Aug. 6 that erroneously inverted his vote totals with opponent Phil Kuyers’ before it was corrected the next day. 

    WZZM did not respond to a request for comment on the error, but told Grand Rapids-based station FOX-17 that “human error” played a part and “as soon as the mistake was realized, correct vote totals were updated.”

    Belknap, a first-time commissioner, was part of a slate of Ottawa Impact candidates in 2022 who primaried longtime traditional Republicans over frustrations with the handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. 

    In his recount request, Belknap also pointed to “complications and outages of online reporting being ‘down,’” referring to the county clerk’s website seeing unusually high traffic, which caused load times to stall as results were being reported on election night.

    “This petition comes from me, the candidate, at the behest of my campaign, volunteers, party delegates and concerned citizens that all due diligence is taken to confirm results,” Belknap wrote.

    Ottawa County Clerk Justin Roebuck said Aug. 21 that the process would take one to two days and was expected to cost about $6,000 to complete and would require about 30 people to review the 11 precincts in District 9 — which includes Grand Haven and Robinson townships as well as a small portion of Spring Lake Township — as well as early voting and absentee ballots.

    Belknap submitted a deposit of $5,000 with his request Monday. The remainder of the costs for the recount would be covered by taxpayer funds. 

    On Friday, Roebuck said the cost would be between $6,000 and $7,000, with taxpayers covering the remaining costs. There were 22 counters present during the hours-long process as well as six election staffers. 

    Both Belknap and Kuyers also had their maximum allowed election observers present, bringing the overall total of people to 44.

    “The result of this recount shows our community the high level of accuracy in our election equipment and the integrity of those on the frontlines of our process — our election workers,” Roebuck said Friday. 

    After the recount, Belknap’s vote total didn’t change, however, Kuyers’ vote total increased by five.

    “Every single ballot container was sealed properly on Election Night, and the list of voters in every precinct matched exactly to the number of ballots. The change in vote totals represented a 0.0007% difference from election night totals,” Roebuck said. “I’m incredibly proud of our team and thankful that as we approach the Presidential Election in November, our voters can be confident that their voice will be heard and their ballots accurately counted!”

    Kuyers will face Democrat Angela Stanford-Butler in the Nov. 6 general election.

     

    GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

     

  • New Ad Shows The Real Trump… He’s CREEPY!

    New Ad Shows The Real Trump… He’s CREEPY!

    The Lincoln Project has been busy compiling some of Donald Trump’s most disturbing moments, and the resulting ad is as creepy as you’d expect. Jackson White breaks it down on Rebel HQ.

  • Jesse Watters Put Fox News in a Rare Position: Covering Its Ass Live on Air

    Jesse Watters Put Fox News in a Rare Position: Covering Its Ass Live on Air

    This week, Fox News was in a rare position: Covering its ass live on air.

    Host Jesse Watters has a history of making misogynist remarks. But on Monday, he took it too far, apparently, by Fox’s low (low) standards. During a roundtable discussion, he made a vulgar remark about Vice President Kamala Harris, claiming she’d be “paralyzed in the Situation Room while the generals have their way with her.”

    Fox News isn’t exactly known for issuing apologies or corrections—they paid almost $800 million in a settlement to avoid doing just that when Dominion, a voting machine company, sued Fox over its rampant 2020 election lies. But, as Mother Jones creator Kat Abughazaleh points out, the real question is how long can Fox indulge “smug assholes” like Watters without getting burned?

    Continue reading on Mother Jones

  • Israel’s West Bank Attacks Fuel Its Annexation Plans

    Israel’s West Bank Attacks Fuel Its Annexation Plans

    During a trip to the West Bank to conduct research and visit her family in Nablus in 2022, Yara Asi remembered the moments when Israel’s military besieged the city, a major economic hub for the region, in an effort to weed out militants living there. 

    “Surely the world is going to intervene and they’re not going to let this major city be closed,” Asi recalled thinking. 

    The military siege lasted more than three weeks, killing more than 23 Palestinians across the territory. That year, Israeli raids and airstrikes killed more than 150 Palestinians, marking the deadliest year for the West Bank since 2006. The attacks — and the loss of life — continued into 2023 and have only accelerated since then.

    While most eyes remain on Gaza, Israeli military attacks on the West Bank killed more than 594 since October 7, including 115 children who were killed by live ammunition, and 1,411 children injured, according to the United Nations. Around a dozen of those deaths can be attributed to violence by extremist Israeli settlers.

    “Nobody intervened — nothing happened — and since then we’ve seen military incursions increasing and increasing, and I don’t see any real movement or even critique,” said Asi, a professor at the University of Central Florida and policy member at the think tank Al-Shabaka.

    Continue reading on The Intercept

  • The Harris campaign takes its ‘freedom’ message to south Georgia — and conservative White women

    The Harris campaign takes its ‘freedom’ message to south Georgia — and conservative White women

    Your trusted source for contextualizing Election 2024 news. Sign up for our daily newsletter.

    The Harris-Walz campaign is turning its attention to Georgia with a bus tour that starts Wednesday — but they’re staying away from the Democratic stronghold that is metro Atlanta and instead heading to south Georgia. 

    It’s part of a bet that voters there — a Whiter, more rural, more conservative area — may be open to what the Harris campaign has embraced as its core value: freedom. Since the beginning of her 38-day-old campaign, Vice President Kamala Harris has made freedom a central theme — it’s the Beyoncé song that she walks out to at rallies and the word that linked discussion of voting rights, abortion and gun safety at last week’s Democratic National Convention (DNC). “Freedom” was in the title of the Harris campaign’s very first TV ad, released July 25, in which she talks about rejecting chaos and hate for the freedom to get ahead, to be safe and to make decisions about your body. 

    The Harris campaign has not been shy about its patriotism, putting strong messages about the promise and potential of America, rooted in love of country, in the foreground of its convention programming and media ads. Veteran grassroots organizers and coalition leaders say it’s a strategy tailor-made to bring moderate and conservative White women into the Democratic tent — by accurately reflecting their concerns, key issues and values. Attracting some of those women is key to winning Georgia, veteran progressive organizers say — and many of these conservative women are in south Georgia. Even if the Harris campaign doesn’t win many of the counties outside metro Atlanta, losing by a smaller margin could be enough to give them the boost they need to take the state. 

    Porsha White, the Harris campaign’s state director in Georgia, said in a memo Wednesday that the campaign has more than 190 staff in 24 offices, calling it “the largest in-state operation of any Democratic presidential campaign cycle.” The memo pointed out that the offices are spread from rural Washington and Jenkins counties to outer suburban Atlanta, including Forsyth County, a longtime Republican stronghold where former President Donald Trump won nearly 66 percent of votes in 2020. 

    This week, the Harris campaign has also begun a blitz of Facebook and Instagram ads targeting Georgia voters, predominantly women. Their message focuses on contrasting Harris and Trump on reproductive freedoms and preserving democracy. 

    Taylor Salditch, the executive director of Supermajority, a progressive grassroots organization that focuses on mobilizing young women voters, said that because freedom is a value to the majority of Americans, it can attract moderate White women. 

    “The idea is that when you organize around a set of values, you are able to move away from the politicized language that we’ve become so entrenched in — and can win elections on a host of issues that you might not have thought we could have won on before,” Salditch said. 

    White women are the single largest voting bloc in the United States, and reaching White women outside of major metro areas is critical for winning elections, said Jackie Payne, the founder and executive director of Galvanize Action, a grassroots group that focuses on persuading more White voters to vote Democratic. It’s why the Harris-Walz campaign’s choice to focus time, money and energy in south Georgia makes sense, Payne said — especially when they are leaning so heavily on messaging that couples patriotism with reproductive rights. 

    Payne cited a recent Galvanize survey that shows that 69 percent of moderate White women believe that abortion should be legal and 47 percent say they won’t vote for any candidate who doesn’t support reproductive freedom. 

    “Between 47 and 69 there’s a lot of opportunities in saying, ‘You believe in this thing — why is it not decisive in your vote?’ I think that’s where the opportunity is with them,” Payne said. 

    Payne also said that Galvanize’s research has shown that “preserving democracy” has become the No. 2 voting issue among moderate White women. It means that those voters could be open to the Harris campaign’s intense focus on patriotism and freedom.  

    “We saw that moderate White women believe that Republicans are more of a threat to democracy than Democrats and that they’re the most likely of any group — liberals, conservatives, moderates — to say that they believe the current system is the best system to protect our freedoms and our rights,” Payne said. “They’re invested in protecting that.”

    The focus of the Harris campaign on freedom — long a Republican buzzword — shows a concerted effort by the campaign to “tap into a moment where for moderate White women, what we see if that patriotism is a very big value of theirs,” Payne said. “They’re very committed to this country. They’re very patriotic. It’s an important part of who they are. And so a freedom frame works very well with them. What they’re experiencing since Dobbs is a visceral experience of freedom being taken away.” 

    Harris Walz rally crowd in Arizona
    The capacity crowd at the Glendale, Arizona Harris-Walz rally at Desert Diamond Center on August 9, 2024. Photo: Mahjimoh Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0

    In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs vs. Jackson Women’s Health Organization that ended a federal right to abortion, Georgia instituted a ban on abortions after six weeks of pregnancy, before many people know they’re pregnant. That ban has crystallized the impact of the Trump-appointed court’s decision in Georgia; a poll done by Reproductive Freedom for All one year after the Dobbs decision found that 72 percent of all Georgia voters say they find the six-week ban “somewhat or very concerning.” Another factor in Georgia: Trump keeps attacking popular Republican Gov. Brian Kemp. Though the two have reportedly reached a tentative peace, many conservative voters in the state are likely to not forget or forgive the extensive personal attacks

    Olivia Troye, a former Trump national security official who resigned from his administration in August 2020 and spoke last week at the DNC, said that for her and other Republican women, the Harris campaign offers a patriotic alternative to Trump, whose message is about how America is “just this awful place.” 

    She thinks Harris can win over Republican women with a message around patriotism and reproductive freedom. “A lot of conservative women are not OK with the extremism that they’re seeing in this country. They may be pro-life, but they’re not pro putting targets on women, targets on doctors. They feel like [abortion] is a very personal decision between their faith, their doctor and their family.” 

    She says that the campaign’s choice to go to south Georgia speaks to an understanding of this feeling among conservative women. “They understand that they need to engage voters directly and they are working hard for that vote. Donald Trump is sitting there at a golf course doing a press conference, and the Harris-Walz campaign is doing a bus tour in south Georgia. They are going out into communities. They’re working for this.” 

    Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner is the executive director and CEO of MomsRising, a grassroots organization that focuses on mobilizing mothers as a voting bloc. She said moms nationwide are concerned about freedom — particularly the freedom to care for and support their families. Polling from 2023 found that 76 percent of Republicans favor paid family, parental and medical leave; 45 percent of Independent women said they would be more likely to vote for a candidate who supports paid family leave. Talking about these issues within the context of freedom only helps make this all the more clear — and shows that the Harris-Walz campaign is also acutely aware of how the Trump campaign is trying to reach these very same women. 

    “A major part of the Republican strategy from day one of losing the White House has been to put mom voters against mom voters, to try to divide and wedge out mom voters, using fear and hate as a spark. That’s why we’re seeing so much messaging about book bans, censorship, and other really divisive issues coming from the Republican Party,” Rowe-Finkbeiner said. Conservative groups like Moms for Liberty are framing pushes to remove books on gender and sexuality or race as giving parents the freedom to shield their kids from topics they find inappropriate. But not all moms see it like that, she said, and the Harris-Walz campaign’s messaging around patriotism and freedom is now offering moderate White women a clear alternative. 

    “People want freedom, and the freedom they want is the freedom to be able to successfully raise kids and go to work, to successfully decide when and if they’re having children, to successfully be able to make decisions about their own bodies, the freedom to be able to have your kids get a great and accurate education,” Rowe-Finkbeiner said. “That’s the kind of freedom moms want.”

    Angela Ferrell-Zabala, the executive director of Moms Demand Action, says the messaging around freedom is crucial to build a winning coalition — and that she has seen how this happened within the gun safety movement and its ability to translate engagement into votes. 

    “The Harris-Walz campaign is saying that freedom is for every American, even if you don’t vote for us. It means being able to show up in your day to day life and not worry about the threat of gun violence. It means being able to send your children to school without fear of being shot and killed. It means being able to send your children to the corner store without fear of being shot and killed. That’s what freedom means,” she said. 

    Having spent a significant amount of time over the last year getting to know and connect with survivors of the Covenant School shooting in Nashville — a group that’s mostly White, conservative women — Ferrell-Zabala said she’s seen up close what happens when organizing can shift away from issues and toward common values. 

    “We put these cookie cutter labels on people and assume, ‘Republicans think this’ and ‘Democrats think this,’ but these conservative women that I’m talking to don’t feel represented by this extreme Republican Party, by the extremists in their party. This doesn’t represent what moderate and conservative women feel — and they are sick and tired of all of the rhetoric and division. They just want to allow all children to thrive and live together in community.”

  • JD Vance Booed By Firefighters

    JD Vance Booed By Firefighters

    Sen. JD Vance got booed by the firefighters union audience members during a speech.

    “Sen. JD Vance, the Republican vice presidential nominee, was booed by a firefighters union audience before his speech at their conference on Thursday.

    Why it matters: Vance’s speech in Boston was a day after Democratic VP nominee Gov. Tim Walz appealed to the same crowd as both tickets vie for the holdout labor union’s endorsement.”

    Read more from Axios here.

  • Methane leaks are a climate problem. These satellites could help find them.

    Methane leaks are a climate problem. These satellites could help find them.


    Spying from space: How satellites can help identify and rein in a potent climate pollutant

    On a blustery day in early March, the who’s who of methane research gathered at Vandenberg Space Force Base in Santa Barbara, California. Dozens of people crammed into a NASA mission control center. Others watched from cars pulled alongside roads just outside the sprawling facility. Many more followed a livestream. They came from across the country to witness the launch of an oven-sized satellite capable of detecting the potent planet-warming gas from space.

    The amount of methane, the primary component in natural gas, in the atmosphere has been rising steadily over the last few decades, reaching nearly three times as much as preindustrial times. About a third of methane emissions in the United States occur during the extraction of fossil fuels as the gas seeps from wellheads, pipelines, and other equipment. The rest come from agricultural operations, landfills, coal mining, and other sources. Some of these leaks are large enough to be seen from orbit. Others are miniscule, yet contribute to a growing problem.

    Identifying and repairing them is a relatively straightforward climate solution. Methane has a warming potential about 80 times higher than carbon dioxide over a 20-year period, so reducing its levels in the atmosphere can help curb global temperature rise. And unlike other industries where the technology to decarbonize is still relatively new, oil and gas companies have long had the tools and know-how to fix these leaks.

    MethaneSAT, the gas-detecting device launched in March, is the latest in a growing armada of satellites designed to detect methane. Led by the nonprofit Environmental Defense Fund, or EDF, and more than six years in the making, the satellite has the ability to circle the globe 15 times a day and monitor regions where 80 percent of the world’s oil and gas is produced. Along with other satellites in orbit, it is expected to dramatically change how regulators and watchdogs police the oil and gas industry.

    “Companies do a good job of complying with the law, but the law has been insufficient,” said Danielle Fugere, president and chief counsel at As You Sow, a nonprofit group that has used shareholder advocacy to push fossil fuel producers to tackle climate change. “So this change will increase incentives for reducing methane emissions.”

    Those at Vandenberg or watching online were a bit on edge. A lot could go wrong. The SpaceX rocket carrying the satellite into orbit could explode. A week before, engineers worried about the device that holds the $88 million spacecraft in place during launch and pushes it into space. “That made us a little nervous,” recalled Steven Wofsy, an atmospheric scientist at Harvard University and a key architect of the project along with Steven Hamburg, the scientist who leads MethaneSAT at EDF. If that didn’t go wrong, the satellite could still fail to deploy or have difficulty communicating with its minders on Earth.

    They needn’t have worried. A couple hours after the rocket blasted off, Wofsy, Hamburg, and his colleagues watched on a television at a hotel about two miles away as their creation was ejected into orbit. It was a jubilant moment for members of the team, many of whom had traveled to Vandenberg with their partners, parents, and children. “Everybody spontaneously broke into a cheer,” Wofsy said. “You [would’ve] thought that your team scored a touchdown during overtime.”

    The data the satellite generates in the coming months will be publicly accessible — available for environmental advocates, oil and gas companies, and regulators alike. Each has an interest in the information MethaneSAT will beam home. Climate advocates hope to use it to push for more stringent regulations governing methane emissions and to hold negligent operators accountable. Fossil fuel companies, many of which do their own monitoring, could use the information to pinpoint and repair leaks, avoiding penalties and recouping a resource they can sell.

    Regulators could use the data to identify hotspots, develop targeted policies, and catch polluters. For the first time, the Environmental Protection Agency is taking steps to be able to use third-party data to enforce its air quality regulations, developing guidelines for using the intelligence satellites like MethaneSAT will provide. The satellite is so important to the agency’s efforts that EPA Administrator Michael Regan was in Santa Barbara for the launch as was a congressional lawmaker. Activists hailed the satellite as a much-needed tool to address climate change.

    “This is going to radically change the amount of empirically observed data that we have and vastly increase our understanding of the amount of methane emissions that are currently happening and what needs to be done to reduce them,” said Dakota Raynes, a research and policy manager at the environmental nonprofit Earthworks. “I’m hopeful that gaining that understanding is going to help continue to shift the narrative towards [the] phase down of fossil fuels.”

    With the satellite safely orbiting 370 miles above the Earth’s surface, the mission enters a critical second phase. In the coming months, EDF researchers will calibrate equipment and ensure the satellite works as planned. By next year, it is expected to transmit reams of information from around the world. Its success will depend on the quality of the data it can produce and — perhaps more importantly — how that data is put to use.

    The European Space Agency released the first global measurements of atmospheric methane three years after launching the Environmental Satellite, or Envisat, in 2002. In 2009, three years before the Envisat mission ended, Japan’s Greenhouse Gases Observing Satellite, or GOSAT, made its orbital debut. These early progenitors established a new era of worldwide emissions accounting, but they lacked the geographic precision required to inform meaningful action.

    In the years since, a hodgepodge of governmental agencies and private-sector organizations has deployed 23 more satellites, including MethaneSAT, to glean additional insights. Some improved upon the pioneering technology by mapping global emissions with greater fidelity and surveying the world with what one could call a wide-angle view. But most measure emissions in targeted areas with what amounts to a telephoto lens.

    The images they collect, however, are nothing like what a Nikon might capture, because methane, like most gases, is invisible to humans. So these satellites rely on a spectrometer to reveal the infrared signature the gas leaves behind, exposing not only its presence, but its concentration. 

    Methane gas detections by satellites
    Methane leaks detected using Carbon Mapper’s aerial imagery of landfills in Georgia and Louisiana (top, from left), and oil and gas infrastructure in the Permian Basin in Texas (bottom). Courtesy of Carbon Mapper

    How large a chunk of the world a satellite can map, and the resolution it can provide, depends primarily upon the magnifying power of its telescope. Typically, a higher magnification allows the examination of smaller areas in greater detail, while a lower magnification is best for analyzing vast areas in less detail. The instruments aboard each satellite have all been designed with a unique combination of sensitivities and resolutions tailored to its primary mission.

    Given GOSAT, for example, was designed to track methane and greenhouse gas concentrations over the entire planet in coarse resolutions, it would have no trouble measuring methane emissions across Southern California and beyond, but it would condense Santa Monica into a single pixel. On the other hand, with the privately owned GHGSat focused on taking images of precise areas and identifying the facilities responsible for emissions, its satellites could map the city of Santa Monica in exquisite detail and pinpoint a sizable methane leak to within 80 to 160 feet, but would struggle to provide any indication of what’s happening beyond the city.

    EDF saw an opportunity to create a satellite capable of doing both by designing MethaneSAT’s instrument to take images that cover 125 miles of Earth’s surface, enough to capture most of an oil field spanning dozens of miles in a single frame with sufficient resolution to identify small groups of wells and other infrastructure within that expanse. The nonprofit and its researchers began to see the need for such a device about a decade ago, at the height of the fracking boom. The organization was coordinating the work of hundreds of scientists who “were creating more data about methane emissions from the oil and gas industry in the U.S. than anyone had,” Hamburg said, “by orders of magnitude.” 

    EDF flew spectrometers aboard airplanes over oil fields, and discovered that the EPA had severely underestimated the amount of methane emitted by oil and gas operations. Although these studies proved invaluable, the scientists couldn’t conduct these labor-intensive, aerial campaigns at the scale or frequency required to understand global methane emissions and how they evolved. That piecemeal approach made clear that no one understood the extent of the problem. Even for the areas they could image, “you’re getting snapshots,” Hamburg said, “but not a motion picture.”

    Hamburg and his colleagues set out to determine what it would take to monitor the world’s most productive oil fields on a near-daily basis to determine where, and how much, methane escaped and how those emissions were changing over time. “We’d done enough looking,” Hamburg said, “that we didn’t think the existing satellites or the planned satellites were going to provide that data.”

    More exposure

  • A Despicable Individual Using Gravestones As Billboards

    A Despicable Individual Using Gravestones As Billboards

     

    Even by “seditionist crapsack standards,” Trump’s grotesque fu**ery at Arlington Cemetery, where he and his henchmen used dead soldiers as a campaign prop, has been reviled as “repugnant,” “nauseating,” and “Too Damn Much,” especially after news they shoved aside a female employee to do it.

    The desperate “hole-in-the-soul” stunt pissed off veterans, their families, the Army and many others; some said they’ve never grinned thumbs-up at a grave, but now they hope to live long enough to get to do it.

    Trump’s latest loathsome move is part of a long, inglorious slide to the bottom. As his numbers drop and his crimes resurface – thank you Jack Smith – he’s ever more incoherent, vindictive, preposterous, often babbling on crumbling Truth Social.

    On Kamala Harris: her “FAKE NUMBERS VERSUS MY NUMBERS,” how she “HAS TO PAY FOR HER FAKE ENGAGEMENT,” how “WE’RE BEATING HER ‘LIKE A DRUM.’” (Harris campaign: “Rent free.”)

    Trashing Walz – RIP Minnesota! – he mourned a “state in shock, the city burned down and it was never built back, it was terrible.” He says Dems want to kill newborns, Biden sleeps too much, Kim Jong Un doesn’t, Hillary and Kamala gave (many) blow jobs, crime is down worldwide because the perps come here.

    Asked in Wisconsin what he’d do to “make life more affordable,” he said, “Some people don’t eat bacon anymore…This was caused by their horrible energy – they want wind all over the place.” One comment: “Operation let him talk is going exceedingly well.”

    For a five-time-draft-dodger who’s heedlessly savored his escape from hell by calling those who didn’t “suckers and losers” – and who famously said of wounded warriors, “Nobody wants to see that” – his imbroglio at Arlington National Cemetery was both shocking and not.

    Having assembled “all the a$$holes somehow compelled to find their way to the side of the one silver-spoon failson a$$hole who would reign supreme over them all” – thank you Uncharted Blue – he decided the best way to troll enemies was by “decorating your campaign with their fallen friends” on Arlington’s hallowed ground.

    The central irony of his hope to highlight the flaws of Biden’s withdrawal from Afghanistan by joining with family members of a soldier killed in the Kabul airport attack: It was Bone Spurs himself who approved the release of 5,000 Taliban fighters in a widely panned deal he negotiated, ignoring warnings from sidelined Afghan president Ashraf Ghani that the move would lead to deadly chaos, which – surprise! – it did.

    So it was that he and his gang of thugs turned up at a wreath-laying ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier on the attack’s third anniversary.

    Then, per the Army, they “abruptly pushed aside” a female public servant who tried to stop them, lumbered into Section 60’s home to fallen veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan – so heavily restricted that any filming at a grave site for political purposes is a violation of federal law – and stood at a grave with his leering goon smirk and teeny thumbs-up to have his fu**ing gruesome, gaudy picture taken at a grave next to several others whose denizens and their pain-filled families were not consulted.

    Hours later, having loudly denied they were using the solemn occasion to make cheesy “badly edited propaganda for their hellscape vision of America,” they released a TikTok video of cheesy badly edited propaganda for their hellscape vision of America. Several classy MAGA pols also appeared, including Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, now under fire for using the images for fundraising.

    After military police were called and wrote up a report, the Army issued an angry statement about the “unfortunate” incident – a rare move, because normal people largely obey the rules of common decency.

    In what was called “a stern rebuke,” they said Trump staff were “made aware of federal laws, Army regulations and DoD policies, which clearly prohibit political activities on cemetery grounds”; they also confirmed the woman was physically shoved, praised her “professionalism…consistent with the decorum expected at ANC,” and noted they conduct nearly 3,000 public wreath-laying ceremonies a year “without incident.”

    Calling ANC “a national shrine to (our) honored dead,” they declared “its dedicated staff will continue to ensure public ceremonies are conducted with the dignity and respect the nation’s fallen deserve.”

    Deep down, though, they probably know anything involving Cadet Orange Slimebag and his horde of scuzzy minions render the likelihood of dignity or respect pretty slim. And so it went.

    Responding with typical restraint and grace, Trump staffers quickly lashed out. Spokesman and piece of work Stephen Cheung sneered the worker “was clearly suffering from a mental health episode,” denied any “altercation,” and threatened to release video proof “if such defamatory claims are made.”

    In a real shocker, they haven’t, except for the mewling TikTok video in which a pious Trump lies, “We didn’t lose one person in 18 months, and then they took over, and that disaster, leaving Afghanistan.”

    Campaign co-chair Chris LaCivita called the woman they assaulted “a disgrace” and “a despicable individual”; later, “taking the team on a death spiral against America’s military,” he said he hoped to “trigger the hacks” at the office of the (female) Army Secretary.

    After the woman employee declined to press charges, reportedly because she feared retaliation by vengeful MAGA-ites, the campaign called her fear “ridiculous,” adding, “It sounds like someone who has Trump Derangement Syndrome.” They seem nice.

    Still, it kept getting worse. There were emails confirming the campaign was told about the rules, but barged in regardless. Federal law § 553.32 was cited: “Memorial services and ceremonies at Army National Military Cemeteries will not include partisan political activities.”

    The “ripples of outrage” swiftly spread to veterans and their families, incensed at a tawdry effort to “borrow their valor.” A pained, plaintive protest came from the family of Green Beret Master Sgt. Andrew Marckesano, a father of three who earned Silver and Bronze Stars in eight combat tours before dying by suicide in 2020 after enduring PTSD; his grave, clearly visible in the video, is adjacent to that of Staff Sgt. Darin Hoover, killed in the Kabul bombing, whose family had invited Trump.

    “Staffers did not adhere to the rules,” wrote Marckesano’s sister of their trespass on “this sacred site.” “Understand that these were real people who sacrificed for our freedom,” she wrote, “and that they are honored and respected accordingly.”

    Retired Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, whose father is buried in Section 60, called the stunt “nauseating” and “repugnant”: “Someone who’d do that should never be Commander-in-Chief.” A Vote Vets ad echoed him. After clips of Trump saying execrable things, they vow, “We are doing our damnedest to make sure no service member ever has to salute you as commander-in chief ever again.”

    “Unforgivable,” wrote a “pissed-off old Army wife” of his “self-aggrandizing behavior on hallowed grounds.” She went on, “Every time I turn around and am virtually certain there’s no more room beneath contempt for any more of Drumpfenfuehrer’s egregious behavior, that malcontent motherf***er proves me wrong.”

    Another: “I have not been able to shake the memory since that disgusting piece of sidewalk scum politicized the sacrifices (made) by those brave enough to do what his cowardice prevented him from doing.” And, “If he wants to film a campaign ad at a cemetery, he should do it on the 1st hole at Bedminster.”

    People stayed pissed when the Army said it “considers this matter closed.” They noted “assaulting a federal employee in the performance of her duties is a felony (18 USC 111).” Some felt higher-ups, quoted anonymously praising the woman for keeping things from “escalating,” were making her a scapegoat to avoid confronting MAGA mania.

    “He’s a public menace” who’d only be more menacing in power, noted a critic who cited the Army’s “Be All You Can Be” boast. “Maybe try being a little more dedicated to enforcing your own friggin’ RULES.”

    They had a point, made clearer after Jack Smith re-indicted him and Trump went on a full-on fascist, bonkers, delirious QAnon social media bender with a deluge of over 50 rabid posts: Dems in orange prison jump suits, Obama tried in public military tribunals, “The World Will Soon Understand” what all these glowing orbs, lights, soldiers, lightning and fat, old, white guy in baggy suit and clown make-up mean: “Nothing Can Stop What Is Coming!”

    Hmm. If it is, they better get their lame act together; so far, J.D. Hillbilly isn’t yet up to the task. After Arlington he tried to deflect, dismiss – “Apparently, somebody (had) a little disagreement with somebody” – and go on wildly misfired offense, telling Kamala she could “go to hell” for criticizing what she hasn’t mentioned.

    Then, hilariously, “You guys in the media are acting like Donald Trump filmed a TV commercial at a gravesite.” LOL. Also: “Abbey Road!” “Hulk Hogan!”, booing firefighters! Trump still yammers: “Who’s Harris?”, “Joe Biden killed their children.” “I really don’t know anything about it,” he prattled on the cemetery video backlash.

    “We have alotta people, you know we’re leading the Internet…It coulda been the parents, it coulda been somebody. If somebody did it, this was a set-up by the people in the Administration. This all comes out of Washington, just like all of these prosecutors come out of Washington…These are bad people we’re dealing with.” Huh. Please just keep talking.

  • The Second Amendment: Overview and History

    The Second Amendment: Overview and History

    Often Referenced, Rarely Interpreted

    The Second Amendment is referenced by the Republican Party more than any other political party. The Republican politicians in Congress take more money from the NRA than Democratic politicians do. While they mention it quite often in political campaign speeches and ads, they don’t often explain exactly what it means in terms of the original text as written by our founders.

    Politicians like to say that the Democratic candidate in any election “is going to take away your guns,” but they know the Second Amendment (as it has been interpreted) would prevent that from ever happening in the real world. Unfortunately, it’s an effective line that you’ll hear repeated by voters as to why the Democrats are “dangerous.”

    The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, ratified in 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights, guarantees the right of individuals to keep and bear arms. This amendment has been the subject of intense debate and legal challenges for centuries, with its interpretation and application evolving over time.

    The second amendment
    The number one cause of death of children in America is gun violence. During a mental health committee meeting, Republican lawmakers suggested they “look at the causes of child suicides, not the methods.” (Aristide Economopoulos for New Jersey Monitor)

    Historical Context

    The Second Amendment emerged from a specific historical context. During the American Revolution, citizens formed militias to defend their communities and fight against British forces. These militias played a crucial role in securing independence. After the war, many Founding Fathers believed that a well-regulated militia was essential to protect the nation’s liberty and prevent tyranny.

    This is where the Second Amendment is misunderstood, causing intense debate between both citizens and politicians alike. Political pundits and Republican voters tend to ignore one particular part of this amendment. A “well-regulated militia” does not mean all citizens, yet the second amendment has morphed into a protection of every American citizen to own firearms.

    The militia aspect is important, but so is the term “well-regulated,” which means to create laws around what is and is not allowed in terms of the militia the writers of this amendment to the constitution are referencing. We’ll begin by looking at the text as it’s written (not as it’s interpreted).

    The Text of the Amendment

    The Second Amendment reads:

    “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

    This text has been the subject of much legal and scholarly analysis, with different interpretations emphasizing either the collective right of the people to form militias or the individual right of citizens to possess firearms.

    Early Interpretations and the Militia Act of 1792

    In the early years of the Republic, the Second Amendment was primarily understood as a collective right. The Militia Act of 1792, passed by Congress, required all able-bodied male citizens between the ages of 18 and 45 to serve in state militias. This law reinforced the idea that the amendment was primarily intended to ensure the existence of a well-regulated militia for national defense.

    The Progressive Era and the Rise of Gun Control

    The Progressive Era (roughly 1890-1920) witnessed a growing interest in social reform and government regulation. This period also saw the rise of gun control movements, particularly in response to increasing rates of gun violence in urban areas. Some states enacted laws to restrict gun ownership, especially for certain groups, such as immigrants and African Americans.

    The Second Amendment and the Supreme Court

    U.S. Supreme Court
    The United States Supreme Court building

    The Supreme Court has played a significant role in shaping the interpretation of the Second Amendment. In the early 20th century, the Court generally upheld gun control laws. However, in recent decades, there has been a shift towards recognizing an individual right to bear arms.

    • District of Columbia v. Heller (2008): This landmark decision affirmed that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense.  
    • McDonald v. Chicago (2010): The Court incorporated the Second Amendment right to bear arms against the states, meaning that individuals in all states have a constitutional right to possess firearms.

    Ongoing Debates and Challenges

    Gun violence protest outside the White House
    “Protect Kids Not Guns, student lie-in at the White House to protest gun laws” by Lorie Shaull is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0.

    Despite these Supreme Court rulings, the debate over the Second Amendment continues. Issues such as gun violence, mass shootings, and the appropriate scope of gun control laws remain highly contentious.

    The ongoing struggle to balance individual rights with public safety has made the Second Amendment one of the most debated and complex issues in American law and politics.

    How do you interpret the text of the Second Amendment? Let us know in the comments!

  • Anti-trans laws may complicate access to the ballot for trans voters

    Anti-trans laws may complicate access to the ballot for trans voters

    This article published in partnership with Them.

    Member support made it possible for us to write this series. Donate to our nonprofit newsroom today to support independent journalism that represents you.

    In Kansas, lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union have drafted a letter reminding election workers that a gender marker on a person’s identification does not need to match or correspond to a voter’s gender expression. Staff for the organization have also held clinics elsewhere to prepare trans Americans for the identification requirements they will have to navigate.

    In eight battleground states, the nonprofit VoteRiders is on the ground helping voters get the identification they need to cast ballots in the November election — and one that reflects who they are. 

    Equality Florida, the state’s leading LGBTQ+ advocacy group, is holding “know your rights” trainings in the wake of new regulations barring many transgender voters from obtaining photo identification that reflects their gender. 

    As Republican politicians push anti-transgender rhetoric ahead of a historic election, transgender and nonbinary Americans are facing new laws and rules that effectively prohibit them and others from obtaining documentation like birth certificates and driver’s licenses that align with their gender identities.

    Advocates are fighting back. They’ve been mobilizing communities and organizing resources to help transgender Americans, an effort aimed at safeguarding their civic rights. Some trans voters have expressed confusion and fear of discrimination at the ballot box that could discourage them from participating in public life.

    “There is a chilling effect,” said Lauren Kunis, CEO and executive director of VoteRiders, which helps voters obtain identification. “There is an unsafe and intimidating environment around existing as trans in society, and definitely in being able to go to the polls safely and cast a ballot.”

    The ripple effect could extend beyond trans people, these advocates warn. Regulations around gender impact cisgender people, particularly women and women of color. America’s decentralized elections system relies on a temporary workforce tasked with enforcing varying policies around identification rules. In states that require voters to “reasonably resemble” the picture on their ID, like North Carolina and Wisconsin, the results could ensnare anyone at the ballot box who doesn’t fit the binary concept of masculinity and femininity traits. 

    “A lot is falling on poll workers to correctly enforce the law,” Kunis added. “And I would argue that is less of a solid protection in states where anti-trans rhetoric is skyrocketing.”

    The measures often focus on sex classification that narrowly defines an individual’s sex as either male or female at birth. They’re among a broad scope of anti-trans legislation that have popped up in Republican-led statehouses in recent years and served as breeding ground for the binary vision of the country embraced by former President Donald Trump and U.S. Sen. JD Vance, his running mate on the Republican ticket. At least nine states in the past two years have explicitly regulated gender in this way, according to a tally by the Movement Advancement Project (MAP), which tracks LGBTQ+ policy.

    And it’s not just laws. Last year, Nebraska’s governor issued a related executive order. In January, a Florida agency announced it would no longer update a trans person’s driver’s license with their correct gender identity. In August, at least one Texas agency, under directive from the state attorney general’s office, implemented a similar policy. 

    Anti-transgender rhetoric was front and center at the Republican National Convention in July, and Trump has taken to verbally targeting transgender people in his campaign. He described Democratic vice presidential nominee Tim Walz recently as “very heavy into the transgender world.” 

    The verbal attacks are against a group that is highly invested in electoral politics. An analysis released in August of respondents to the 2022 U.S. Transgender Survey, widely seen as the most comprehensive study of binary and nonbinary transgender Americans, found that voting-eligible trans people had cast ballots in the last presidential election at a higher rate than the U.S. population. The study included more than 92,000 respondents, including more than 84,000 adults who were 18 and older.

    “Trans votes count,” said Ankit Rastogi, director of research for the National Center for Transgender Equality, which conducted the survey and will soon be known as Advocates for Trans Equality Education Fund. “I think the big takeaway is that our community is really trying to come out and make a difference through the democratic process.”

    The new laws and rules around sex classification vary widely. Those that intentionally target government identification that people use in everyday life, like driver’s licenses, are particularly challenging. Forcing a person to show identification that does not align with their gender identity could out them to people in their community, as Lucas Cameron-Vaughn, an attorney for the ACLU of Tennessee, explained.

    “Trans people, just like everyone else, want to be able to travel, start new jobs, open bank accounts, enroll in school, vote — all of those things require some form of ID. And so when a state goes out of its way to enforce its message about its belief about sex and gender on a license, and transgender people then have to publicize that when they show other people, it creates a dangerous environment,” he said.

    Last year, Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee, a Republican, signed a bill into law that defines sex as “determined by anatomy and genetics existing at the time of birth.” The state’s Department of Safety and Homeland Security then created a rule banning transgender people from changing gender markers on their driver’s licenses. The ACLU sued the agency for discrimination, claiming the rule was adopted illegally because it didn’t follow proper administrative procedure. 

    Like with other laws targeting transgender people, including bans on transgender student-athletes from participating in women’s sports, politicians supporting these policies frame them as protecting cisgender women.

    “It’s a tactic that’s designed to splinter support for trans rights and suggest sort of who is harmed by protecting trans people — to frame that as cisgender women being the people harmed by protections for trans people,” said Rose Saxe, who is deputy project director for the ACLU’s LGBT & HIV Project.

    Nearly 21 million voting-eligible U.S. citizens do not have a current driver’s license, according to the Center for Democracy and Civic Engagement at the University of Maryland, whose research was partially supported by VoteRiders. Black and Hispanic people are among those most likely not to have a current license, so the requirement harms them too, regardless of their gender identity.

    In the 2024 election, 38 states will require voters to show some form of identification at the polls, including 17 states that have new or stricter ID laws passed since 2020. 

    The full impact of these laws amid new and evolving voter identification laws is not yet clear, in part because of how recent they are — and that, experts say, could mask their harm. The Williams Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law, estimated ahead of the 2022 midterm election that more than 200,000 voting-eligible transgender Americans may find it difficult to vote at the time because of voter ID laws. 

    But these don’t just affect transgender people. In many red states, Republican-led attacks on transgender people are going hand-in-hand with new identification requirements and other laws that pose barriers to the ballot that reach beyond gender lines.  

    “The states with the anti-trans laws are also the ones that are more likely to be passing anti-voter laws, full stop,” Kunis said.

    In Florida, which has emerged as a national epicenter of policies targeting LGBTQ+ people in recent years, the state’s Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles issued a new regulation barring residents from updating their gender identity on their drivers’ license.

    To Quinn Diaz, a public policy associate at advocacy group Equality Florida, the failure of most anti-LGBTQ+ bills introduced in this year’s legislative session showed that the tide in Florida is turning. But the new gender marker regulation signals yet another way that state agencies in Florida have overstepped their bounds and been “weaponized” to target transgender Floridians, they argued.

    “We saw it as a move to inflict maximum chaos and misunderstanding,” Diaz said. “And really to scare trans folks from even participating and getting the license if they needed to update it.”

    Even before the introduction of such regulations, transgender people around the country have had to jump through logistical and administrative hoops to get an affirming identification. 

    For transgender people, lacking identification that reflects their gender identity and appearance can make them vulnerable to discrimination in everyday situations at a bar or liquor store, for example, and in interactions with law enforcement and at the polls. 

    “With these laws in Florida, you’re forced to choose between living authentically and just not really participating in public life,” Diaz said. 

    Diaz, who is transgender, moved to Florida from Massachusetts, where they had an “X” gender marker on their driver’s license. Because they didn’t have all the necessary documentation and weren’t established yet with a local provider when they transferred their license to Florida, they forfeited that marker and defaulted to a license with their sex assigned at birth. 

    Diaz said they didn’t have any problems voting in person in the 2022 midterms, but they plan to vote by mail this November.

    “I can imagine that a lot of trans folks in Florida who might not have access … to an accurate and affirming ID might not want to engage in that process at all, especially in such a heightened political environment,” Diaz said.

    Such rhetoric could also be most dangerous in states where far-right groups are trying to recruit poll watchers. Since 2020, many Republican-controlled states have passed laws expanding the authority of those temporary election observers who work elections under certain rules and may feel compelled to stop someone from voting under the guise of stopping widespread election fraud, which has been repeatedly debunked.

    “Gender nonconforming people are already under such public scrutiny nationwide,” Diaz said. “That’s when you’re gonna see the convergence of those two elements. It really seems like it would only result in more discrimination, more discomfort for trans people, more interrogation and potentially just being turned away.” 

    Hazel Krebs, a 42-year-old transgender woman living in Kansas, one of the states with a new anti-trans law, felt the weight of that increased scrutiny as she cast her ballot in March. Krebs wondered whether her identification — one that for weeks no longer reflected her gender identity — might impact her ability to vote.

    She chatted with the election workers in the mostly empty precinct, then showed her ID. She did her homework, learned that gender is not required information to vote and showed up ready to explain it.

    But no one questioned her. Krebs voted and was out of the polling site within minutes. Still, she worries that, under the same circumstances, another trans person might have stayed home.

    “They won’t stop me, but I can see how it would stop others,” she said. “It is almost certainly stopping some people from showing up at the polls.”

    The ACLU, which is tracking some of these laws and rules, has tried to prepare election workers on how to process trans voters who come into their polling sites. VoteRiders is conducting year-round voter education. While the driver’s license is the most ubiquitous form of identification in the United States’ car-centric society, Kunis wants to dispel the “common misconception” that it’s the only form of ID people can use to vote. 

    Trans voters can obtain a U.S. passport or passport card that reflects their gender identity without needing to provide underlying documentation. However, that option may not be accessible to people who struggle to pay the related fees or may not have the time  or knowledge required to fill out the forms and request the passport. 

    It’s also a temporary solution if a future presidential administration rescinds the ability for people to self-attest their gender on their passports. Some advocacy groups and lawmakers in Florida also argue the state’s new regulations conflict with the federal Real ID Act, but that question is unlikely to be resolved before November. 

    In addition to using passports as identification, Diaz said that Florida voters have the option to vote by mail, vote early in person and bring a friend or family member to the polls.

    “Our ability to participate in this democracy in Florida, it’s been on the line for a while,” Diaz said. Transgender people, they said, are being “forced to choose between participating in our greatest civic right or just sitting out because the state doesn’t see us for who we are.”

    It’s still unclear how many trans people will be denied affirming identification — and how many will choose not to vote — as a result of these new regulations. Several of the new laws are written with no clear penalties.  

    “Something that’s very frustrating for us at VoteRiders is you will never be able to capture the number of people who do not feel safe voting, and who therefore stay home. And you also won’t be able to capture the people who are trans and show up to try and vote and are turned away.” Kunis said. “And we know that is happening, but it is difficult to quantify.”

    Cameron-Vaughn said he also worries about a scenario where a trans person is stopped at a polling place because of mismatching information on their identification and must fill out a provisional ballot — a voting option that often requires a person to return at a later date with more documentation to ensure their vote is counted.

    “There are definitely the physical dangers, the dangers for harassment, discrimination — but also ultimately, voter suppression,” he said. 

    Josie Caballero, director of voting and elections for the group that conducted the 2022 U.S. Transgender Survey, said it’s important to remember that barriers to voting existed for trans people before the latest slate of laws and rules targeting sex classification, particularly around voter ID rules. Trans people turned out to vote despite those policy roadblocks.

    “It really shows the resiliency of the trans community to ensure that our voices are heard and we have visibility at the ballot box,” she said.

    Krebs, who plans to vote in November, is worried about how the dynamics of a crowded polling site might impact her ability to vote. But she is determined to access the ballot, and to stay in Kansas despite the heightened scrutiny.

    “There’s nothing these laws will do to stop me from living my best life,” she said. “It just puts my energy and passion towards making this place better for me and other trans people.”

  • Harris, Walz defend past statements, promise ‘opportunity economy’ in CNN interview

    Harris, Walz defend past statements, promise ‘opportunity economy’ in CNN interview

    WASHINGTON — Vice President Kamala Harris on Thursday defended her values and vowed, if elected, to appoint a Republican to her cabinet in her first major sit-down interview since her presidential campaign began just over a month ago.

    Harris, who rose to the top of the Democratic ticket after President Joe Biden dropped his bid in July, spoke to CNN’s Dana Bash in Savannah, for roughly 30 minutes with her running mate Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz by her side.

    The interview came a week after Harris formally accepted the party’s nomination at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago. Harris had recently become the target of criticism for not yet participating in an unscripted interview with a major news outlet.

    Harris and Walz sat down with the network anchor Thursday afternoon in Georgia during a pause in the pair’s two-day bus tour through the southeastern region of the battleground state.

    Harris told Bash that she envisions building an “opportunity economy” for the middle class, including expanding the child tax credit to up to $6,000, providing a $25,000 tax credit for first-time homebuyers, and combating “price gouging,” to which Harris attributed high grocery prices.

    The vice president ticked off Democratic accomplishments under Biden, including capping the price of insulin and reducing child poverty under a pandemic-era temporary expansion of the child tax credit that eliminated the work requirement and paid families in monthly installments.

    “I’ll say that that’s good work, there’s more to do, but that’s good work,” Harris said.

    The CNN anchor pressed Harris on her changes in policy positions, including immigration and fracking.

    Republicans have pounced on Harris’ past statements and accuse her of changing her tune to appeal to more centrist voters. Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday dubbed her “FLIP-FLOPPING KAMALA” on his Truth Social platform, where the current GOP presidential nominee posts numerous times a day.

    “​​Let’s be clear, in this race I’m the only person who has prosecuted transnational criminal organizations who traffic in guns, drugs and human beings,” Harris said when asked about her past position on decriminalizing the border. “I’m the only person in this race who actually served a border state as attorney general to enforce our laws, and I would enforce our laws as president going forward, I recognize the problem.”

    Harris also defended her switch from opposing fracking to supporting it.

    “I think the most important and most significant aspect of my policy perspective and decisions is my values have not changed. I have always believed, and I have worked on it, that the climate crisis is real,” Harris said.

    Despite attacks from Republicans, Bash noted that the Democratic National Convention featured quite a few speakers from the GOP side of the aisle.

    Prompted to the idea by Bash, Harris said “it would be a benefit to the American public” to appoint a Republican to her administration cabinet, if elected — though she didn’t name names.

    “I have spent my career inviting diversity of opinion. I think it’s important to have people at the table when some of the most important decisions are being made that have different views, different experiences,” she said.

    Harris brushes off Trump’s insults

    The interview revealed for many that Harris and Trump have never met face-to-face.They will do so for the first time on the debate stage on Sept. 10, an event that will air on ABC News.

    As for her thoughts on Trump, Harris told Bash that the former president is “diminishing the character and the strength of who we are as Americans.”

    When Bash asked Harris to respond to Trump’s attacks, including questioning her race, the vice president only briefly addressed them.

    “Same old tired playbook, next question please,” she said.

    Bash then moved to the topic of the Israel-Hamas war to which Harris responded that she is “unequivocal and unwavering in my commitment to Israel’s defense and its ability to defend itself,” adding that “how it does so matters.”

    She reiterated her plea for a peace deal that includes rescuing hostages who remain in Hamas captivity.

    “​​A deal is not only the right thing to do to end this war, but will unlock so much of what must happen next. I remain committed, since I’ve been on October 8, to what we must do to work toward a two-state solution where Israel is secure, and in equal measure, the Palestinians have security and self-determination and dignity.”

    Walz defense

    Bash asked Walz to respond to controversy around how he described his military service that spanned more than two decades in the Army National Guard, but never included combat deployment. Questions arose when Walz said he carried weapons “in war” in a 2018 video where he was speaking about gun violence, according to The Associated Press.

    Walz, who also worked as a public school teacher and high school football coach, said he misspoke and that his “grammar is not always correct.”

    “I wear my emotions on my sleeve, I speak especially passionately about our children being shot in schools and around guns. So I think people know me. They know who I am. They know where my heart is, and again, my record has been out there for over 40 years to speak for itself,” Walz said.

    Bash also asked Walz about his mix-up when describing he and wife’s fertility method; he said it was in vitro fertilization — a topic that has fractured anti-abortion voters — while in reality the couple used artificial insemination.

    Walz told Bash, “I certainly own my mistakes when I make them.”

    “I spoke about our infertility issues because it’s hell, and families know this. And I spoke about the treatments that were available to us, that had those beautiful children. That’s quite a contrast in folks that are trying to take those rights away from us,” he said.

    Just as the interview ended, Trump posted to his Truth Social platform the word “BORING!!!”

     

    GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

     

  • Trump delivers marathon speech in Michigan railing against Harris: ‘She just doesn’t care’

    Trump delivers marathon speech in Michigan railing against Harris: ‘She just doesn’t care’

    Former President Donald Trump talked to Michiganders in Eaton County for over an hour Thursday, delivering this overarching message about his opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris: “She just doesn’t give a damn about you.”

    Hundreds of attendees at Alro Steel in Potterville chanted Trump’s name as he spoke in Michigan, which could serve as one of the deciding states in the Nov. 5 election. Trump was surrounded by steelworkers who stood on stage holding campaign signs for hours during the rally despite the summer heat pouring into the building.

    Trump promised a better economy if he’s elected and again predicted “World War III” if Harris should win in November, as he did at a Monday speech at a National Guard conference in Detroit.

    “I’m here today with a simple message for the American autoworker and for the American worker, your long economic nightmare will very soon be over. It’s going to be over. Turn it around with your vote. We will defeat comrade Kamala Harris, and we will bring back the American dream.” Trump said.

    Although Michigan, like other states, suffered mass unemployment during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, University of Michigan researchers determined at the end of last year that the U.S. is likely to avoid a recession over the next two years and Michigan will see economic growth.

    The U.S. economy continues to show signs of strength, growing faster in the second quarter than first reported, with the gross domestic product (GDP) — which encompasses consumption, investment, government spending and trade — clocking in at 3%, up from an initial estimate of 2.8%. Inflation fell to 2.9% in July, down from over 9% during the pandemic, but it’s still above the Federal Reserve’s target of 2%.

    Trump doesn’t have a leg to stand on when it comes to talking about the economy, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, a vocal supporter of Harris’ campaign, told the press on Wednesday, calling attention to the hostility between the United Auto Workers union and Trump.

    “Michiganders already know what Donald Trump would do to our economy, and it’s a ‘no thank you’ from us,” Whitmer said. “When I came into office, Donald Trump had shipped Michigan jobs overseas, including thousands of auto jobs. He tried to undermine our unions every way that he could.”

    Many Michigan leaders attended the rally, including state House Minority Leader Matt Hall (R-Richland Twp.), Senate Minority Leader Aric Nesbitt (R-Porter Twp.), Michigan Republican Party Chair Pete Hoekstra Barry County Sheriff Dar Leaf and former Trump-endorsed GOP gubernatorial nominee Tudor Dixon.

    Speakers included Michigan GOP U.S. Senate nominee Mike Rogers, who’s facing U.S. Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D-Holly), and Republican former state Sen. Tom Barrett, who’s running against former state Sen. Curtis Hertel (D-East Lansing) in the 7th Congressional District. Both Rogers and Barrett offered their support for Trump and he returned the praise during his speech.

    Former President Donald Trump speaks at a rally at Alro Steel in Potterville, Michigan on Aug. 29, 2024
    Former President Donald Trump speaks at a rally at Alro Steel in Potterville, Michigan on Aug. 29, 2024 (Photo by Anna Liz Nichols/Michigan Advance)

    The visit to Eaton County, which Trump narrowly won over in 2020 by about 500 votes, comes after media reports that Trump violated federal law when he filmed political activity at Arlington National Cemetery Monday during a wreath-laying ceremony for the 13 service members killed during the 2021 suicide bombing at the Kabul airport in Afghanistan. A cemetery employee also said she was assaulted by a member of Trump’s team.

    The U.S. Army issued a statement to the media saying participants visiting Arlington were made aware of the federal laws prohibiting political activities in the cemetery and an Arlington employee “who attempted to ensure adherence to these rules was abruptly pushed aside.”

    Trump told the crowd in Michigan that the families of the deceased asked him to come to the ceremony and asked him to take pictures with them over the graves of those killed.

    “Last night, I read that I was using the site to politic, that I used it to politic. This all comes out of Washington, just like all of these prosecutors come out of Washington. They all come out. They send their prosecutors into the DA’s office. They send them into the attorney general’s office. These are bad people we’re dealing with,” Trump said. “They ask me to have a picture, and they say I was campaigning …  The one thing I get is plenty of publicity. I don’t need that. I don’t need the publicity.”

    “Joe Biden killed their children by incompetence,” Trump said on Thursday. “Kamala killed their children just as though they had a gun in their hand. …  And then they accused me of having a picture taken at the tombstone with a family, because they love the president. They love me and I love them.”

    But Harris doesn’t care, Trump said, calling Harris a “Marxist,” “fascist” and too “incompetent” to lead, as she was too apathetic as vice president on immigration.

    “Here is what we know about ‘Comrade’ Kamala Harris. She just doesn’t care about the American people, especially hardworking people or middle-class Americans. She just doesn’t give a damn about you,” Trump said. “She does not care about the deaths, sex, slavery drugs or criminals coming across our border. She’s been vice president for almost four years, and she did nothing to stop the invasion of our country.”

    Trump has campaigned on illegal immigration in Michigan several times, with Republican leadership in Michigan often rails against Biden’s border policy at the Mexican border. However, border crossings have declined significantly for the last five months.

    Although Trump said there’s a lot of lies circulating about him and he will go down in history as the most poorly treated president, he said he is resolute to lead, arguing Harris is “no good” and Biden is “sleeping.” He added that voters are smart people and deserve a president who respects them and speaks to them at their level.

    “I have your back. I have your heart and I have every other part of your body,” Trump said. “All of us today are part of the greatest political movement in the history of our country. This is the greatest movement in the history of our country.”

    Along with promising secure borders and an economic boom, Trump said with a “smart president” like him, even countries like China and Russia don’t have to be adversaries, but the American people need to hold out until November, turn out and vote.

    And although protecting reproductive rights have been at the core of Harris’ campaign, and abortion was a key issue driving  voter turnout for 2022 Michigan Democratic victories, Trump argued on Thursday that Harris doesn’t stand for women’s rights.

    “She just does not care. She does not care about women’s rights because she supported destroying women’s sports and athletic scholarships. She wants men to play in women’s sports,” said Trump, who supports a ban on transgender athletes.

    Trump appointed three of the Supreme Court justices who voted to overturn Roe v Wade in 2022 and he’s taken credit for the decision. During this campaign, Trump has trumpeted that it’s now up to states to determine abortion policy.

    “We have abortion. We have the whole thing brought back into the states where it belongs,”Trump said Thursday. “That’s where everybody wanted it for years and years and years, and they’re voting on it. And I happen to believe in the exceptions Ronald Reagan did for life of the mother, rape, incest, the exceptions, probably 90% of the people do.”

    Trump has made many, sometimes contradictory statements about abortion. In 1999, for instance, Trump said, “I’m very pro-choice, I hate the concept of abortion … but… I still believe in choice.” During his 2016 campaign, he said “there has to be some form of punishment” for women who get abortions.

    Polling has consistently shown strong support for abortion being legal in most cases and states like Michigan have enshrined protections for reproductive rights in their constitutions. At a July event in Michigan, Harris said that reproductive rights are still being threatened, contending that Trump will sign a national abortion ban if he wins in November.

    At the same time, Trump told NBC Thursday he’s undecided on Florida’s abortion rights ballot measure and criticized the state’s abortion policy saying, “The six-week [ban] is too short. … I want more weeks. … We need more than six weeks.”

    Democrats also have warned that another Trump presidency would endanger access to other forms of reproductive health care such as in vitro fertilization (IVF) as Republicans have introduced bans in some states.

    But Trump announced Thursday that his administration will mandate insurance companies to pay for all costs associated with IVF treatment as part of a “pro-family” administration, although he did not release details.

    Trump said he wanted to clear the air about his views, saying, “we want more babies, to put it very nicely.”

    Michigan Advance is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Michigan Advance maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Susan J. Demas for questions: info@michiganadvance.com. Follow Michigan Advance on Facebook and X.

  • Federal Court: TikTok May Be Liable for a 10-Year-Old’s Death

    Federal Court: TikTok May Be Liable for a 10-Year-Old’s Death

    Taiwanna Anderson’s life changed forever in December 2021, when she found her 10-year-old daughter Nylah unconscious, hanging from a purse strap in a bedroom closet.

    Barely an adolescent, Nylah wasn’t suicidal. She had merely come across the “Blackout Challenge” in a feed of videos curated her for her by TikTok’s algorithm. The challenge circulating on the video-sharing app encouraged users to choke themselves with household items until they blacked out. When they regained consciousness, they were supposed to then upload their video results for others to replicate. After several days in a hospital’s intensive care unit, Nylah succumbed to her strangulation injuries. Anderson sued TikTok over product liability and negligence that she alleges led to Nylah’s death.

    For years, when claimants tried to sue various internet platforms for harms experienced online, the platforms benefited from what amounted to a get-out-of-jail-free card: Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a 1996 statute that offers apps and websites broad immunity from liability for content posted to their sites by third-party users. In 2022, a federal district judge accepted TikTok’s Section 230 defense to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Anderson based on the assessment that TikTok didn’t create the blackout challenge video Nylah saw—a third-party user of TikTok did.

    “TikTok reads 230 of the Communications Decency Act to permit casual indifference to the death of a ten-year-old girl.”

    Continue reading on Mother Jones

  • Harris-Walz Interview Ratings Nearly Double Trump’s Last Big CNN Sit-Down

    Harris-Walz Interview Ratings Nearly Double Trump’s Last Big CNN Sit-Down

    The first joint interview with Vice President Kamala Harris and her running mate Tim Walz was watched live by nearly 6 million viewers on CNN Thursday night, according to the Nielsen data—far outpacing the viewership that tuned the last time Donald Trump appeared on that network.

    It was a strong night for CNN, which has struggled recently to reach the ratings of Fox News or MSNBC. Although it’s a much lower audience rating than Harris and Walz’s big DNC speeches, it’s still a promising stat for the Harris campaign, continuing a trend of her events receiving higher viewership than those from her opponent.

    When Trump gave a town hall on CNN in May 2023, one of his first proper campaign events of the 2024 election cycle, only 3.3 million viewers tuned in. And more recently, when Trump did his first joint sit-down with running mate JD Vance this July, they drew in an estimated 4 million viewers. All of those cable ratings, however, still trail the average audience for the network’s nightly news broadcasts, which tend to bring in around 7-8 million viewers.

    Read more at The Daily Beast.