Archive by Author

Extreme positions dangerous for both parties in Roe

Does anyone want to win elections anymore? The leak of the draft majority opinion that would overturn Roe v. Wade has been manna for the extremes — both Democrats and Republicans. There are two unassailable truths from the polling: 1) the public does not favor a no exceptions ban on abortion, not even among conservatives and 2) the public is against unrestricted, unregulated abortion. Importantly, the issue remains lower in public priority, putting its ability to move the election in question.

Gallup has been polling this issue for decades, with both an absolute ban and unrestricted abortion continuously in the clear minority. The best a ban has polled was 23 percent in favor in May 2009; current support is at 19 percent. Support for no restrictions was at a high in 1993 at 34 percent, with current support at 32 percent. Gallup has 48 percent in the middle at legal “under certain circumstances.”

What are those circumstances? YouGov has polled most extensively recently, finding strong majorities favoring allowing abortion under the “three exceptions” of rape (67 percent), incest (67 percent) and to save the mother’s life (75 percent), including majorities of conservatives in each case. Respondents also accept abortion when there is little or no chance that the child would be born alive, 62 percent to 21 percent, including 42 percent of conservatives to 36 percent opposed.

Beyond those qualifications, things get complicated — and how the question is posed makes a big difference. In 2021 Gallup found that only 41 percent support a ban on abortion after 18 weeks of pregnancy, yet when asked about a ban in the “last 3 months” of pregnancy (same thing), 81 percent supported as recently as 2018.

Gallup has polled a series of restrictions, but the numbers are more than a little old. In 2011, Gallup found support for requiring doctors to inform of the risks of an abortion (87 percent), a 24-hour waiting period (69 percent), parental consent for an adolescent (71 percent), and 64 percent opposed the partial-birth abortion procedure. In 2003, requiring a doctor to provide information on alternatives to abortion was favored at 88 percent.

Will overturning Roe help the Democrats?

Overturning Roe on its own is a positive political development for Democrats, but both Democrats and Republicans are doing everything they can to hurt their political positions. Like both the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections, it’s another race to the bottom for both parties.

The American public overall does not want the status quo changed. In the YouGov poll after the leak, 60 percent believe the issue is on the “wrong track,” more than unemployment, race relations and immigration: 46 percent opposed overturning Roe(35 percent in favor), with Gallup reporting 58 percent opposing in 2021.

The good news for Democrats is that abortion has become a markedly more important issue, rising from just 4 percent naming it the most important issue (and among the least important issues) in the YouGov poll immediately before the Roe leak, to 8 percent with 11 percent of liberals calling it the most important issue in the May 10 poll — placing abortion only behind health care and climate change. For conservatives, the numbers barely budged, rising from 5 percent to 7 percent.

Such a strong move hints at increased enthusiasm for the mid-terms, a typically dispirited affair for the president’s party. Normally, the party that just lost the presidency is angry and motivated, with the party in power experiencing a combination of the various factions in the winning coalition unhappy they cannot get everything they want and the inevitable letdown after winning. That dynamic has been a part of American politics for decades and structurally sets the Republicans up for a big year.

What the Democrats need is motivation for their base. Clear public support for legality of abortion and some generous fearmongering could be just what the Democrats need to make up for lack of enthusiasm. Combined with Donald Trump’s antics, the Democrats might just be able to stanch the bleeding enough to stop a Republican Senate majority.

Of course, per contemporary American politics, the Democrats are doing their level best to wreck their own chances.

Claims that interracial marriage and civil rights are about to disappear make Chicken Little look like a cock-eyed optimist. Angry protests outside Supreme Court Justices’ homes are disturbing, to say the least. And when fences are put up around the court complex, it starts to look like the Democrats are planning their own insurrection.

The Democratic Senate gave Republicans a bit of an opening by attempting to pass a federal law that would have codified Roe. The measure, which would have provided for any of the multiple popular restrictions, lost with even moderate Republicans Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins voting against.

Challenging Democratic overreach are the Republicans’ own activist wing with talk of outright bans with no exception — a highly unpopular option. Making abortion always illegal has only 13 percent support, including just 23 percent of conservatives. When the phrase banned from “conception” is used, the total rises to 18 percent overall and 34 percent among conservatives — still very low.

Abortion has arguably been a winner with Republicans for much of the past 40 years. The pro-life movement has had more energy and enthusiasm, which has allowed it to punch above its polling. But that strength has been rooted in advocating for restrictions that are generally popular with the public. The more creative recent restrictions have much less public support — and an outright ban is not just unpopular, it is motivating Democrats.

If Republicans want to recover on this issue, they need to stick with the “three exceptions” and kick the issue to voter referenda in the states. Democrats would be wise to allow for some restriction and regulation. Unfortunately for both parties, wisdom is in short supply these days.

Keith Naughton, Ph.D., is co-founder of Silent Majority Strategies, a public and regulatory affairs consulting firm. Naughton is a former Pennsylvania political campaign consultant. Follow him on Twitter @KNaughton711.

Source: TEST FEED1

Biden set to redeploy troops to Somalia, reversing Trump withdrawal

President Biden will redeploy troops to Somalia to counter al-Qaeda affiliate al-Shabaab, reversing former President Trump’s decision to withdraw forces from the country near the end of his administration.

“President Biden has approved a request from the Secretary of Defense to reestablish a persistent U.S. military presence in Somalia to enable a more effective fight against al-Shabaab, which has increased in strength and poses a heightened threat,” a senior administration official told The Hill in a statement.

“This is a repositioning of forces already in theater who have travelled in and out of Somalia on an episodic basis since the previous administration made the decision to withdraw in January 2021,” the official continued.

The official didn’t say how many troops would be sent to Somalia. The New York Times, which first reported the move, cited officials saying the number would be no more than 450 troops.

The Times also reported that Biden had signed off on the proposal from the Pentagon earlier this month.

In December 2020, Trump ordered the 700 troops stationed in Somalia to withdraw by early 2021. Those troops were helping to quell al-Shabab by training local forces and carrying out airstrikes.

At the time, the then-president said it was part of his efforts to end “forever wars,” and his administration stressed that the move did not signal that the U.S. was disengaging from Africa.

The plan was for those troops to be reassigned to neighboring countries to allow the US to still conduct operations in Somalia.

In early March, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Pentagon wanted Biden to send troops back to Somalia to stop the spread of al-Shabaab.

At the time, a senior intelligence official told the outlet that it had seen an uptick and activities from the group, and that because there was no pressure on them, there were fears that the group would become a wider threat.

Source: TEST FEED1

Jill Biden teams up with Selena Gomez for youth mental health event

Jill Biden and Selena Gomez are teaming up for a White House event focused on youth mental health.

The first lady will participate in the Youth Mental Health Action Forum, organizers announced Monday.

Along with Biden and the “Lose You to Love Me” singer, the Wednesday gathering at the White House — led by MTV Entertainment and the Department of Health and Human Services — will also include policy adviser Susan Rice, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy and more than 30 activists and creators.

The aim of the two-day inaugural forum, organizers said, is to “drive culture from awareness to action on mental health through storytelling and media.”

It’s not the first time that Gomez has joined forces with the Biden administration to talk mental health. In 2020, the 29-year-old former Disney Channel star appeared in a video alongside then-Democratic vice presidential candidate Kamala Harris.

“I myself have shared my story about my mental health journey and I just read too much, I think, about how deep this country is being affected mentally,” Gomez, said at the time. “I’ve had so many dreams about creating places people can go to,” she said.

Earlier this year, Murthy said that COVID-19 is having a “devastating” effect on young people’s mental health and well-being.

“I’m deeply concerned as a parent and as a doctor that the obstacles this generation of young people face are unprecedented and uniquely hard to navigate,” Murthy said in February.

Source: TEST FEED1

Obamas partner with Airbnb CEO for $100M scholarship fund

The Obama Foundation announced Monday that former President Obama and former first lady Michelle Obama will partner with Airbnb CEO Brian Chesky to create a $100 million scholarship fund.

The Voyager Scholarship, The Obama–Chesky Scholarship for Public Service, will fund about 100 students’ college tuitions who are committed to a life of public service.

“We need a generation of leaders who are willing to cooperate and build bridges, but it’s hard to build a bridge if you haven’t seen the other side of the river,” said Airbnb co-founder Chesky. “The Voyager Scholarship will broaden their horizons and give these young leaders tools and experiences that will shape their careers. There are young people across the country who have a passion for public service, but can’t pursue it because of their student loan debt. We want to help reduce that burden.”

Former President Obama added: “If we want this next generation of leaders to be able to do what they need to do, they have to meet each other. They have to know each other. They have to understand each other’s communities, You’re going to find young people from every corner of this country who are going to be future change makers. There are leaders everywhere. We just have to find them.”

Michelle Obama discussed her personal interest in promoting education, especially in disadvantaged communities.

“Education is personal for me,” she said. “I’ve met so many young people who are interested in public service, but they’re wondering how they’re going to pay for school or whether they’ll get to see the world beyond their own community. We could not be more grateful to team up with Brian to help out these young people on their journey to create change.”

The scholarship will pay for students’ junior and senior years of college, providing them with up to $25,000 of financial aid for each of the two years.

Scholarship winners will also receive a stipend and free Airbnb housing for a summer work and travel experience as well as an additional $2,000 every year for ten years after their graduation from college.

Source: TEST FEED1

Hawley makes war on business and property rights to score MAGA points

Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) is quickly proving that his zeal to garner a MAGA headline knows virtually no limits — including constitutional limits and those that protect American business — especially when it comes to one-upping his Republican political rivals.

In the race among the 2024 GOP presidential nomination candidates whose names are not Donald Trump, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is Hawley’s leading competitor. To steal some of DeSantis’s thunder, Hawley appears ready not only to undo property and free speech rights, but also to bust a foundation of America’s international trade.

Last Tuesday, Hawley proposed the “Copyright Clause Restoration Act,” which his press release characterized as “strip[ping] woke corporations like Disney of special copyright protection.”

The bill would roll back the duration of copyright protection to 56 years — the protective period that Congress enacted in 1909. Currently, in the case of corporations owning copyrights, they last 95 years. In the case of individuals, copyright protection lasts 70 years after the author’s death.

Importantly, Hawley’s bill would compress those protections retroactively for the largest entertainment companies, such as the Disney company. And that is the whole point, as his press release singling out Disney made clear. Hawley’s bill is aimed directly at Disney’s copyright of its original Mickey Mouse.

In April, DeSantis got the anti-Disney campaign rolling to advance his own claims as a culture war gladiator. Recall that the entertainment giant, which operates Disney World in Orlando, criticized DeSantis’s “Don’t Say Gay” act that restricts discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity in schools.

DeSantis retaliated by immediately pushing through legislation rescinding the Disney World’s special municipal status. He probably didn’t anticipate that it also would prompt bond agencies to consider lowering Florida’s bond rating, a move that makes future borrowing more expensive for cities and towns.

Hawley’s one-upmanship risks greater harm to American business and global standing.

Property rights — and especially intellectual property rights — lie at the core of the U.S. economy and future economic prosperity. Property rights promote progress by rewarding creators and inventors and attracting capital investment. The retroactive expropriation of the rights belonging to Disney and other large corporations would take property rights without just compensation, a violation of the Constitution’s due process clause.

The government doing so in retaliation against one company also violates the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech.

And that’s not all.

Hawley’s limit of 56 years would put the United States in violation of the Berne Convention, the major international copyright treaty that supports enforcement of U.S. copyright interests abroad and which requires signatories to enact copyright duration of not less than the author’s life plus 50 years.

Reasonable people can debate whether Congress’s decision to expand copyright duration was a good idea (and especially to add another 20 years in 1998) — we have our doubts — but there is no question that it played a critical role in gaining U.S. entry into the Berne Convention.

As global trade in creative arts and technology expanded in the mid-to-late 20^th century, the United States took on a leadership role in the global intellectual property arena. A principal element of that strategy was to adapt its copyright law to gain entry into the Berne Convention. A series of amendments, including expanding copyright duration, enabled the U.S. to join the Berne Convention in 1989. Intellectual property accounts for almost 40 percent of all U.S. exports.

Violating the Berne Convention puts America’s billions of dollars in international sales of movies, books, music, computer software, and other creative arts at risk and undermines U.S. leadership in this important arena. Trade sanctions and financial penalties are easy to imagine were this bill to be adopted.

Elected officials who revere the Constitution and American business do not sell them out for political opportunism. Hawley’s “Copyright Clause Restoration Act” is the kind of publicity stunt that undermines both core Constitutional values and economic stability.

Hawley is undoubtedly aware of the ramifications of his bill on property rights and international trade. But political ambition beckons. His proposed legislation is a new low in his race to the bottom of Republican political demagoguery.

Peter S. Menell is the Koret Professor of Law at the University of California at Berkeley and co-author of “Intellectual Property in the New Technological Age.”

Dennis Aftergut is a former federal prosecutor, currently of counsel to Lawyers Defending American Democracy.

Source: TEST FEED1

Chris Rocks says he's 'still kind of processing' Oscars in first comments since slap

Comedian Chris Rock on Wednesday said he was “still kind of processing” Sunday’s shocking Academy Awards, during which Will Smith walked onstage and slapped him. …
Source: TEST FEED1

Academy begins disciplinary proceedings against Will Smith

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announced Wednesday that it is beginning disciplinary proceedings against actor Will Smith after he slapped Chris Rock on stage at Sunday night’s Oscars event….
Source: TEST FEED1

Trump's push for Russian dirt on Biden is latest GOP headache

Republicans are finding themselves on defense again after former President Trump urged Russian President Vladimir Putin to release dirt on the Biden family.The remarks are the latest Trump-fue…
Source: TEST FEED1

McCarthy: Cawthorn had 'no evidence' for orgy allegations, has 'got to turn himself around'

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) on Wednesday said Rep. Madison Cawthorn’s (R-N.C.) allegations of being invited to orgies and seeing people do cocaine were unfounded and that he would not rule out further…
Source: TEST FEED1