Archive by Author

Taylor Swift 'absolutely terrified' by Roe decision

Taylor Swift says she’s “absolutely terrified” by the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

In a 6-3 decision on Friday, the court struck down the landmark 1973 ruling granting a constitutional right to an abortion.

Swift took to social media hours after the Supreme Court’s ruling was announced.

“I’m absolutely terrified that this is where we are,” the “Only the Young” singer wrote to her more than 90 million Twitter followers, “that after so many decades of people fighting for women’s rights to their own bodies, today’s decision has stripped us of that.”

The 32-year-old Grammy Award winner also shared a statement from Michelle Obama, who described herself as “heartbroken” by the Supreme Court’s “horrifying decision.”

Swift, who remained virtually silent on politics for much of her career, has become more outspoken in recent years, particularly following Donald Trump’s 2016 White House win.

In 2019, Swift voiced her support for abortion rights as Tennessee lawmakers weighed a near-total ban in the state.

“Obviously, I’m pro-choice,” the performer, a critic of Trump, said in an interview.

“I just can’t believe this is happening,” Swift said at the time.

Source: TEST FEED1

DeSantis vows Florida will expand limits on abortion after court ruling

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) has vowed that his state will work to expand its abortion restrictions after the Supreme Court on Friday upended the landmark Roe v. Wade decision.

“Florida will continue to defend its recently-enacted pro-life reforms against state court challenges, will work to expand pro-life protections and will stand for life by promoting adoption, foster care and child welfare,” DeSantis said in a statement.

Abortion currently is legal in Florida up to 24 weeks of pregnancy, but a new law set to take effect next week will restrict abortions to up to 15 weeks, with no exceptions for rape or incest. The state has the third-highest rate of abortion in the country.

“By properly interpreting the Constitution, the Supreme Court has answered the prayers of millions upon millions of Americans,” DeSantis said.

DeSantis, who is currently running for reelection as governor, is seen as a potential candidate for the GOP’s nomination for president in 2024 as his national profile has grown. Recent polls have suggested that he could be a formidable challenger to former President Trump, who hasn’t said whether he’ll make a third run for president in 2024.

Trump and former Vice President Mike Pence, who has been making trips in recent weeks to early primary states, suggesting he’s also considering a 2024 run, both also praised the Supreme Court’s decision.

Rather than strictly ruling on the case before them, which dealt with a 15-week abortion ban in Mississippi, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority specifically said that it was overriding previous rulings that had ensured abortion access across the country.

“We hold that Roe and [Planned Parenthood v. Casey] must be overruled. The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the majority. “This Court cannot bring about the permanent resolution of a rancorous national controversy simply by dictating a settlement and telling the people to move on.”

The Florida Supreme Court has ruled in the past that the state’s constitutional privacy amendment protects abortion rights there beyond federal law. That could ultimately be upended through further court action in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision though. Republicans hold control of both chambers of the Florida Legislature.

Source: TEST FEED1

Driver abandoned $250,000 McLaren sports car on side of road after accident, police say

(NEXSTAR) – A driver in Washington state fled the scene of an accident after getting an expensive McLaren 600LT sports car wedged underneath a guard rail earlier this week.

Trooper Robert Reyer of the Washington State Patrol shared news of the collision early on Tuesday morning on Twitter, confirming an investigation into a “hit and run” involving the 2020 luxury vehicle.

Included with Reyer’s tweet were several photos of the car, which appeared to have gotten stuck directly under a guard rail on State Road 512, near Tacoma. The car also looked to be totaled.

When asked if there were any known injuries, Trooper John Dattilo said Friday morning that the WSP could not confirm one way or the other.

“We aren’t sure on injuries since we haven’t spoken to the driver,” Trooper Dattilo told Nexstar.

WSP officials did not say whether they believed the McLaren was the only vehicle involved in the accident.

Speaking with The Oregonian earlier this week, Dattilo said these kinds of accidents — where drivers abandoned their cars because they don’t want to “get in trouble” — are very common.

“But it’s not necessarily common for it to be a $200,000 McLaren, though,” Dattilo told the outlet.

Police added that the car had dealer plates and was registered to a resident of Washington state. It was not reported stolen.

Dattilo told Nexstar that officials had yet to make contact with the driver of the McLaren as of Friday and were still working to contact the owner.

A McLaren 600LT sold for upwards of $259,000 during its 2020 model year, according to Car & Driver. McLaren, a British auto manufacturer, describes its 600LT models as “not [cars] for the faint-hearted” on its official website.

“This is a track animal let loose on the road. Our new sportscar benchmark. The fastest, most powerful and most extreme – yet road legal – Sports Series. Ever.”

Source: TEST FEED1

Air pollution exposure may help forecast death risk: study

Environmental factors such as air pollution may help predict people’s chances of dying — particularly from conditions like heart attack and stroke, a new study has found.

Exposure to above average levels of outdoor air pollution increased risk of death by 20 percent and increased risk of death from cardiovascular disease specifically by 17 percent, in a widespread survey published in PLoS One on Friday.

The use of wood- or kerosene-burning stoves for cooking and heat homes without proper ventilation increased death risk by 23 percent and 9 percent respectively — raising the specific risk of death by cardiovascular disease by 36 percent and 19 percent, the study determined. 

To arrive at these figures, researchers from the NYU Grossman School of Medicine and the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai combed through personal and environmental health data from 50,045 rural villagers in northeast Iran.

All study participants — most of whom were poor residents of Iran’s Golestan region — were over the age of 40 and agreed to have their health monitored during annual visits that began as far back as 2004, the researchers said.

Within the group, there were more than 2,700 cardiovascular deaths and 6,000 all-cause deaths during a 10-year follow-up period, according to the study.

Using data from NASA alongside geographical information systems technologies, the researchers mapped out eight environmental risk factors across Golestan: fine particulate pollution; household cooking, heating and ventilation; proximity to traffic; distances from sites that perform coronary intervention; socioeconomics; population density; land type; and nighttime brightness.

The scientists determined which environmental factors posed the most threat by combining them into a single model and controlling for interactions between them, lead author Michael Hadley, a fellow in cardiology and incoming assistant professor of medicine at Mount Sinai, explained in a statement.

They found that unlike air pollution, some of the other factors included in the analysis — such as population density, nighttime light and neighborhood income levels — were not independent predictors of death risk, the authors said in a second news release.

Compared with residents who had easier access to specialized medical services, those living farther away from clinics equipped with catheterization labs — capable of unblocking arteries — incurred a 1-percent increased risk of death for every 10 kilometers (6.2 miles) of distance, the study found.

In Golestan, most people live more than 50 miles away from such facilities, the authors noted.

Living within about 0.06 miles of a small roadway and 0.25 of a large highway was linked to a 13-percent increased risk in all-cause mortality, according to the study.

Unique from traditional studies on environmental risk, these findings offer evidence from individuals in low- and middle-income areas, the scientists noted. Most such previous research has focused on urban populations in high-income countries, with accessible healthcare services, according to the authors.

“These results illustrate a new opportunity for health policymakers to reduce the burden of disease in their communities by mitigating the impact of environmental risk factors like air pollution on cardiovascular health,” Hadley said.

Source: TEST FEED1

Affordable Connectivity Program needs permanent funding

Even amidst bitter partisanship over federal spending and inflation, Democrats and Republicans seem to have found a rare patch of common ground in their shared support for major federal investments to expand broadband connectivity. Authorities in both red and blue states are eagerly embracing unprecedented federal funding from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, signed into law last November by President Biden, that could finally bring high-speed internet service to every corner of the country.

But universal deployment, while critical, won’t even get us halfway to our end goal of full digital inclusion. Our recent report explains why: For every American without broadband service available, up to twice as many have service available but still don’t subscribe.

This is the “broadband adoption gap,” and it has stubbornly persisted for years, even as the availability gap has narrowed. 

According to the Pew Research Center, approximately 23 percent of U.S. adults do not subscribe to home broadband. These non-subscribers are disproportionately lower income, less educated, older, persons with disabilities, living in rural areas, and/or from communities of color. For instance, while only 8 percent of adults living in households earning more than $75,000 lack a home internet connection, 43 percent of adults living in households earning less than $30,000 a year do not subscribe.

Fortunately, the infrastructure bill gives state and local governments flexibility to spend federal funding on programs combating this broadband adoption gap. The Commerce Department’s recent guidelines for the bill’s $42.5 billion broadband buildout allow state broadband offices to put remaining funds toward adoption-related programs once they have plan in place to wire their state’s unserved and underserved areas. Other federal efforts, including the American Rescue Plan’s broadband programs, give state and local governments similar flexibility.

To make broadband more affordable for the most vulnerable households, the infrastructure bill also created the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP), which provides eligible low-income households with up to $30 monthly broadband subsidies and a one-time benefit of up to $100 to help buy a computing device. 

The ACP is working — almost 12 million U.S. households have signed up already. But this surging demand is also eating through the program’s $14.2 billion of funding.

Based on current trends, our economic model shows that funding for the ACP is likely to run out by mid-2024 — about two years from today. Extending these trends, we project that funding the ACP broadband benefit (but not devices) for an additional five years could cost $30 to $35 billion.

While that might sound like a large amount, this investment would be well worth its social and economic benefits. As the last couple of years have brought into stark focus, having a home broadband connection is necessary for online education, working from home, and attaining skills needed for meaningful participation in the digital economy and society. 

Ongoing ACP funding alone will not likely get the job done. There are other critical issues that can’t be overlooked — lack of a device, lack of digital skills, illiteracy, a lack of interest in the internet and what it has to offer, and a range of barriers tied to endemic poverty. But tackling this broader set of challenges will only become much harder without the ACP’s ongoing assistance for households that want to subscribe but need the financial support.

Policymakers have several options to extend ACP funding. Some have argued that, going forward, the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC’s) Universal Service Fund (USF) should support the ACP. This would significantly increase the USF budget and the burden on consumers, including those we want to incentivize to adopt broadband.

Others have argued that Congress should appropriate the additional funds needed to extend the ACP for several more years. Appropriations would avoid the market distortions caused by the FCC assessing additional fees on consumers. However, a path through Congress is uncertain in the current political climate.

The most immediate path is for state broadband offices — using discretion granted to them under the infrastructure bill’s BEAD Program, as well as other federal funding programs — to extend ACP funding for eligible households in their states. Given other priorities, not every state will be able to extend the ACP’s duration or widen its eligibility. But that should not stop states that can close the ACP funding gap from doing so.

To ensure that broadband services remain affordable for low-income households, Congress and the states should act now to permanently fund the Affordable Connectivity Program. Failure to do so risks denying tens of millions of Americans access to economic opportunity.

Paul Garnett, Founder and CEO of the Vernonburg Group, has over two decades of experience in telecommunications and technology law and policy, market development, business development, strategic alliances, and technology and business model incubation.

Source: TEST FEED1

Here's when adults gain the most weight: study

American adults gain the most weight between their 20’s and 30’s, according to a recently published study tracking adults across ten years.  

The study, published in the Journal of Obesity, found that more than half of adult participants gained five percent or more over a ten-year period. Another third gained more than 10 percent.  

For the study, researchers analyzed data from more than 13,800 randomly selected participants from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. 

Adults gained an average of 17.6 pounds between their 20s and 30’s, while the average weight gain for a person between their 30s and 40’s fell to 14.3 pounds. 

They also found that women on average gained more weight than men over the study period. Women put on an average of 12 pounds compared to six pounds for men. 

“The U.S. obesity epidemic is not slowing down,” said study lead author Larry Tucker, a BYU professor of exercise science. “Without question, 10-year weight gain is a serious problem within the U.S. adult population.” 

America is changing faster than ever! Add Changing America to your Facebook or Twitter feed to stay on top of the news. 

Researchers concluded if adults gained the average amount of weight over each decade of their lives, they would put on an average of more than 45 pounds.  

“In roughly 20 years, the prevalence of obesity increased by approximately 40% and severe obesity almost doubled,” Tucker said. “By knowing who is more likely to become obese, we can help health care providers and public health officials focus more on at-risk individuals.” 

The World Obesity Atlas, released in March, projected one billion people across the globe will be living with obesity by 2030.  

READ MORE STORIES FROM CHANGING AMERICA 

HERE’S THE AGE WHEN AMERICANS GET THE LEAST AMOUNT OF SLEEP 

MOST AMERICANS AGREE THAT TRANSGENDER MEN AND WOMEN ARE DISCRIMINATED AGAINST: POLL 

WHAT TO KNOW ABOUT THE NEW NOVAVAX VACCINE FOR COVID-19 

ABORTIONS IN THE US INCREASED IN 2020, REVERSING A MORE THAN 30-YEAR DECLINE 

LIZZO REMOVES ‘HARMFUL WORD’ FROM SONG: ‘I NEVER WANT TO PROMOTE DEROGATORY LANGUAGE’ 

Source: TEST FEED1

Marjorie Taylor Greene swarmed outside Court

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) was swarmed by the media and angry pro-abortion rights protesters as she walked through a crowd of demonstrators outside the Supreme Court, just about 15 minutes after announcement of its decision overturning the landmark Roe v. Wade abortion rights case.

“You are a traitor,” someone in the crowd yelled at Greene.

“Lock her up,” another person chanted.

But Greene, celebrating the decision, smiled as her staff blocked protesters advancing at Greene and escorted her to a secure location.

“I am so happy. It’s a blessing. It’s a miracle,” Greene said.

She then turned her attention to pro-abortion demonstrators.

“I think we have to worry about the radical left,” Greene said. “They’re going to perform an insurrection here at the Supreme Court.”

“We’ve got to protect women. Ruth Sent Us is a domestic terrorist group, and so is Jane’s Revenge,” Greene added, referencing pro-abortion rights groups that have targeted Catholic churches and anti-abortion centers. “Anyone who is supporting abortion is supporting them.”

The group Jane’s Revenge has claimed responsibility an arson attack at the office of Wisconsin Family Action, an anti-abortion group, last month.

Greene told The Hill that the Supreme Court was “courageous” for the decision in Dobbs vs. Jackson Women’s Health, and noted that the decision does not outlaw abortion nationwide.

“It’s just taking it back to the states, giving the right back to the states to make their own laws regarding abortion, which is extremely important,” Greene said.”

Thirteen states have trigger bans designed to ban abortion once Roe is overturned, however. Missouri was the first state to have a “trigger ban” take effect on Friday following the ruling.

Source: TEST FEED1

Biden says court leading nation down 'extreme' path

President Biden on Friday accused the Supreme Court of taking an extremist path with its decision overturning the Roe v. Wade decision on abortion rights, arguing the court made a “tragic error.”

“This is an extreme and dangerous path the court is now taking us on,” Biden said of the court’s 6-3 decision, which effectively wipes out what had been seen as a constitutional right for more than a half a century.

“It’s  a sad day for the court and for the country,” Biden said in remarks from Cross Hall at the White House. “The health and life of women in this nation is now at risk.” 

Biden specifically called out the court for completely overturning Roe v. Wade and leaving the decision on abortion rights entirely to the states.

He said this would mean a woman who was the victim of rape and incest would not longer be able to get an abortion — unless a state law provides such an exception.

Source: TEST FEED1

Collins: Abortion ruling 'inconsistent' with what Gorsuch, Kavanaugh told me

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) on Friday said conservative Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch misled her about their views on the importance of Supreme Court precedent during their confirmation proceedings in 2017 and 2018. 

Collins, who voted to confirm then-President Trump’s first two conservative nominees to the court despite her support for abortion rights, has said she believed those justices would hold up important precedents such as Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 case that established a right to abortion. A 6-3 court majority that included Kavanaugh and Gorsuch struck down that right on Friday.

“This decision is inconsistent with what Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh said in their testimony and their meetings with me, where they both were insistent on the importance of supporting long-standing precedents that the country has relied upon,” Collins said, explaining her votes for those nominees during the Trump administration.  

Collins joined Democrats Friday in denouncing the decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

“The Supreme Court has abandoned a fifty-year precedent at a time that the country is desperate for stability,” she said in a statement. “This ill-considered action will further divide the country at a moment when, more than ever in modern times, we need the Court to show both consistency and restraint.” 

Collins argued that “throwing out a precedent overnight that the country has relied upon for half a century is not conservative.” 

“It is a sudden and radical jolt to the country that will lead to political chaos, anger, and a further loss of confidence in our government,” she said.  

The Maine senator voted against conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination in 2020 because she said the Senate should follow the precedent set by late Justice Antonin Scalia’s vacancy in 2016 and not confirm a new justice to the high court immediately before a presidential election.  

But Collins voted for Kavanaugh in 2018 and Gorsuch in 2017 despite warnings from pro-abortion rights groups that they would likely vote to overturn Roe v. Wade.  

Collins said in a 2018 CNN interview that she believed Kavanaugh would uphold the landmark abortion rights case out of respect for Supreme Court precedent, known as the doctrine of stare decisis.  

“I do not believe that Brett Kavanaugh will overturn Roe v. Wade,” she told CNN’s Dana Bash.  

When Bash asserted that precedents are overturned all the time, Collins responded: “They aren’t overturned all the time.”  

“He says for a precedent, a long-established like Roe, to be overturned it would have to have been grievously wrong and deeply inconsistent. He noted that Roe had been reaffirmed 19 years later by Planned Parenthood versus Casey and that it was precedent on precent,” Collins said in the interview. 

“He said it should be extremely rare that it be overturned,” she said, recounting Kavanaugh’s statements during his confirmation proceedings.  

Collins on Friday pointed out that she and fellow moderate Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) have introduced the Reproductive Choice Act to codify abortion rights established by Roe v. Wade and later upheld by Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992.  

“Our goal with this legislation is to do what the Court should have done — provide the consistency in our abortion laws that Americans have relied upon for 50 years,” she said. 

Source: TEST FEED1