Daily Archives: January 9, 2021

Business Owners Ask Croatian Government: When Can We Start Work? – Total Croatia News

Posted: January 9, 2021 at 2:56 pm

January the 7th, 2021 - The Croatian Government has a lot on its plate, but one pressing question comes from the owners of catering and hospitality establishments who have suffered enormous losses until now. Their one single question is: When can we start working again?

As Poslovni Dnevnik wrires, although the current epidemiological measures which were adopted at the end of last year will cease in a few days, when it comes to precisely what will happen next, no one knows.

''In any case, the Croatian Government must adopt quality economic measures as soon as possible, because the problems we've been talking about for months haven't just disappeared,'' writes the Association of Entrepreneurs.

''Recently, the Voice of the Entrepreneurs (Glas Poduzetnika) Association sent a letter to the Croatian Government and the National Civil Protection Headquarters, in which we asked them to inform business owners about further economic and epidemiological measures as soon as possible. Namely, it was announced that the measures will last until January the 8th, 2021, of which we're not far away from. Business owners and artisans who had to close their doors now don't know when they'll be able to continue doing business at all.

There is no information on whether such people will be able to continue working or whether the restrictive measures will be extended. We consider that to be inadmissible.

We believe that the Croatian Government and the National Civil Protection Headquarters should inform business owners and craftsmen about further steps as soon as possible. Uncertainty has been going on for more than nine months for many and the situation is getting worse. Moreover, we still don't have an answer to the question about compensation for activities that are prevented from operating due to the measures. Business owners are interested in whether the Croatian Government will compensate them for the huge losses incurred due to business restrictions? Furthermore, many activities that aren't formally closed, such as passenger transport and travel agencies, are failing. Unfortunately, more and more people end up at the Croatian Employment Service, and we currently have 160,000 unemployed people. We believe that this trend will continue if quality economic measures aren't adopted soon.

We're fully aware of the new crisis we're experiencing, and we've transferred our available resources to help Sisak-Moslavina County, but the problems caused by the coronavirus crisis that brought tens of thousands of companies to their knees haven't simply disappeared.As a reminder, job preservation grants aren't an aid measure for business owners. In addition, this measure won't save the business of companies nor will it enable the recovery of the economy.

Many UGP committees sent out letters proposing measures that would allow companies and crafts to survive, however, they never received any responses. Business owners are being left to fend for themselves again, without any information on when they'll be able to resume work. We appeal to the Croatian Government to make decisions on the measures as soon as possible and to inform those affected about this.

Business owners showed care and solidarity in the period following the earthquake in Petrinja, and by working out in the field and donating goods and money, they came to the aid of the victims, but soon they will have to start thinking about their own survival again,'' reads the letter from the aforementioned association.

"We hope that the Croatian Government has an agenda and that in the next few months it will make sure that business owners and entrepreneurship don't enter even more troubled waters, and that the proper conditions for survival in this situation are provided. Legal changes, write-offs of taxes and contributions for the affected areas and the abolition of VAT payments for donated goods are necessary. Instead, the Croatian Government is proposing new commitments and various unnecessary Regulations on monitoring and reporting on the effects of the coronavirus pandemic and measures to help the economy. In that way, it's merely createing yet more new and unnecessary paperwork, while the number of failing companies and the number of unemployed people is growing unstoppably day by day,'' said Drazen Orescanin, the executive director of the association.

For the latest travel info, bookmark our main travel info article, which is updated daily.

Read the Croatian Travel Update in your language - now available in 24 languages

Join the Total Croatia Travel INFO Viber community.

Go here to read the rest:

Business Owners Ask Croatian Government: When Can We Start Work? - Total Croatia News

Posted in Abolition Of Work | Comments Off on Business Owners Ask Croatian Government: When Can We Start Work? – Total Croatia News

Red Bull Theater’s reading of ‘The African Company Presents Richard III’ reflects on a real moment in Black history – DC Metro Theater Arts

Posted: at 2:56 pm

On Monday, January 11, Off-Broadways Red Bull Theater will premiere its live benefit reading of Twin-Cities playwright Carlyle Browns 1987 work The African Company Presents Richard III at 7:30 pm. The momentous drama, based on a true incident in the history of Americas first-known Black theater company in NYC, considers the issue of racial discrimination in the theater community in the early 19th century, six years before the final abolition of slavery in New York state in 1827, 42 years before the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863, and half a century before Black Americans had the right to vote.

The play is set in September 1821, when two rival theater companies in Manhattan one Black and one white simultaneously scheduled productions of Shakespeares Richard III. Established that year by retired West-Indian steamship steward William Henry Brown, The African Company where James Hewlett (the first African-American Shakespearean actor) and the legendary Ira Aldridge (who went on to achieve acclaim on the stages of London and throughout Europe) were among the principal players was attended by both Black and white audiences, drawing patrons away from Stephen Prices uptown white-owned Park Theatre. That popularity resulted in threats, bribery, false accusations, and manipulation of the law against The African Company, as the troupe made the decision to continue its performances.

Red Bulls Founding Artistic Director Jesse Berger noted, The battle in this country over who gets to tell Shakespeares stories and who should has raged . . . up to our present day. Carlyles play gives us a personal and poetic window through which to look in on our ever-present racially charged past, helping us better understand our own times, and how we all might think about who gets to tell whose stories.

The playwright also addressed the present-day relevance of his compelling subject. We now live in an era that is reflective of early 19th-century America. We are becoming a world as our early American world began, as a multicultural world. We are living in a world, where, at the very least, artists, anyway, are making culture out of cultures. And we are seeing in the world today not just a clash of cultures, but unification, Brown said. He went on to posit, Who owns Shakespeare one might ask? You might as well ask who has the right to breathe, to dream, to express themselves, to be themselves, to live in and make a meaningful contribution to their world. I submit to you that as human beings this is an obligation and responsibility for all of us.

The timely reading will be directed by Carl Cofield and performed by Clifton Duncan, Edward Gero, Dion Johnstone, Paul Niebanck, Antoinette Robinson, Craig Wallace, and Jessika D. Williams. It will be supplemented with an interactive post-performance Bull Session webinair discussing the play and its themes with Brown, Cofield, scholar Marvin Edward McAllister, and members of the company on Thursday, January 14, at 7:30 pm. Registrants will receive a link to participate in this vital conversation.

The African Company Presents Richard III streams live at 7:30 pm, on Monday, January 11. The event is free, but tax-deductible donations ($25 suggested) are welcome to support the ongoing work of Red Bull Theater. Advance reservations are recommended to receive a reminder with the link to the livestream. A recording of the reading will be available until 7 pm, on Friday, January 15.

Continued here:

Red Bull Theater's reading of 'The African Company Presents Richard III' reflects on a real moment in Black history - DC Metro Theater Arts

Posted in Abolition Of Work | Comments Off on Red Bull Theater’s reading of ‘The African Company Presents Richard III’ reflects on a real moment in Black history – DC Metro Theater Arts

DOL Issues New Tip Regulations: Will 2020 Be The Last Year Of 80/20? – JD Supra

Posted: at 2:56 pm

Seyfarth Synopsis: Just before the holidays, the Department of Labors Wage-Hour Division issued its final pay regulations governing tipped employees. The final regulations, which were published December 22, 2020 and will be effective March 1, 2021, provide a ray of hope in what was an otherwise miserable 2020 for hospitality employers. The regulations codify the abolition of the 80/20 tip credit rule and guide the circumstances in which back-of-the-house employees can be included in tip pools. The regulations explicitly exclude managers and supervisors from taking a share of employees tips. In 2021, hospitality employers will have to watch how the courts interpret these regulations.

The End Of The 80/20 Rule?

The main course in the DOLs regulations, and one for which hospitality employers have grown hungry, is the end of the 80/20 rule at least from the DOL. The 80/20 rule has had a somewhat complicated recipe. As those familiar with the tip credit know, an employer can pay certain employees who receive tips from customers a wage below the minimum wage. This practice is permitted on the theory that the tips employees receive from customers will more than make up the difference. But doing so requires an employer to meet some technicalities, including that this tip credit can be taken only for the hours the employee spends working in a tipped occupation. So, for example, a server at a hotels restaurant can be paid the tip credit for the hours they spend as a server, but not for the hours they spend at the hotel as a maintenance employee. More difficult questions emerge, however, when the server spends part of their time on duties related to server duties, but that do not produce tips, such as cleaning or setting tables. Under DOL regulations, tipped employees are allowed to perform related duties occasionally, but the DOLs regulations have never defined those two terms.

To fill the plate, the DOL issued some opinion letters and then in 1988 the DOLs Field Operations Handbook an operations manual made available to investigators ultimately determined that a tipped employee could spend no more than 20% of their time on related duties (which remained undefined) and remain eligible to be paid under the tip credit. In other words, an employee would have to spend 80% of their time performing tipped job duties. The 80/20 dual jobs rule remained a little-known side dish until more than a dozen years ago, just after wage-hour collective and class litigation began its boom. As can be imagined, tip credit litigation blew up as well, with many cases generating seven-figure settlements centering on whether restaurant servers side work is a related duty and what percentage of time servers spend performing those duties.

In November 2018, the DOL sought to abolish the 80/20 rule through an opinion letter and a field assistance bulletin. In its place, the DOL explained that an employer may take a tip credit for time when an employee in a tipped occupation performs related non-tipped duties either contemporaneously with or for a reasonable time immediately before or after performing tipped duties. Under this rule, the DOL explained, when a tipped employee engages in a substantial amount of separate, non-tipped-related duties, such that they have effectively ceased to be engaged in a tipped occupation, the tip credit is no longer available. Further, the DOL defined related duties by stating that a non-tipped duty is presumed to be related to a tip-producing occupation if it is listed as a task of the tip-producing occupation in the Occupational Information Network O*NET.

Beginning in early 2019, however, as Seyfarth previously reported, district courts largely have refused to give it deference and have clung to the 80/20 rule. Several of them reasoned that the opinion letter and field assistance bulletin did not provide persuasive reasons for an abrupt change in position after decades of the 80/20 rule. Strangely, these district courts instead have chosen to defer to the no-longer-effective 80/20 rule, or have imposed it as a matter of judicial fiat.

Therefore, in the late 2019, the DOL issued a proposed regulation and then, last week, published final regulations that hopefully will be the death blow to the 80/20 rule. In doing so, the DOL largely restated, with some minor tweaks, the guidance from its November 2018 opinion letter and field assistance bulletin. Perhaps responding to some of the criticism of district courts, the DOL in these regulations sought to explain why it was abandoning the 80/20 rule. For example, among other reasons, it stated:

An employer of an employee who has significant non-tipped related duties which are inextricably intertwined with their tipped duties should not be forced to account for the time that employee spends doing those intertwined duties. Rather, such duties are generally properly considered a part of the employees tipped occupation, as is consistent with the statute.

It remains to be seen if district courts will defer to this guidance now that the DOL has officially codified the rule. They should, as this guidance is reasonable and went through lengthy notice-and-comment rulemaking. Further, employers must be mindful that some states (e.g, Connecticut, New Jersey) have enacted their own versions of the 80/20 rule, in which employers in those states will need to follow regardless of the DOLs new rule.

Back-of-House Staff May Collect Tips In Mandatory Nontraditional Tip Pools

In addition, the DOLs regulations also address amendments to the FLSA made in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2018. The new regulations do not change longstanding regulations that apply to employers that take a tip credit under the FLSA. Employers that claim a tip credit must ensure that a mandatory traditional tip pool includes only workers who customarily and regularly receive tips. Under the new regulations, however, employers that do not claim a tip credit may now implement mandatory, nontraditional tip pools. In this scenario, tip pools may include employee who do not customarily and regularly receive tips, including back-of-house employees that may not be customer-facing, such as cooks and dishwashers.

Managers and Supervisors: Keep Your Hands Off Employees Tips!

The new regulations also explicitly prohibit managers and supervisors from keeping employees tips for any purposeeven in a nontraditional tip pool situation during which the employer does not take a tip credit and back-of-house employees are permitted to take a share of tips. In order to prevent employers from keep[ing] tips, the new regulations require employers who collect tips and redistribute them through a mandatory tip pool to redistribute the tips no less often than when it pays wages to avoid penalties. The regulations also require employers who collect tips and redistribute them through a mandatory tip pool to keep records of the same even if the employer does not take a tip credit.

See original here:

DOL Issues New Tip Regulations: Will 2020 Be The Last Year Of 80/20? - JD Supra

Posted in Abolition Of Work | Comments Off on DOL Issues New Tip Regulations: Will 2020 Be The Last Year Of 80/20? – JD Supra

The need to digitalize Japanese society as a whole – The Japan Times

Posted: at 2:56 pm

Prime Minister Yoshihide Sugas administration is gearing up to establish an agency that will lead the digital transformation of Japan.

But the key to success is for the agency to create a blueprint for Japans digitalization from administrative services to working with the private sector and nurturing engineers and have the necessary power to work toward that goal.

What needs to be done to prevent the digital agency from being another bureaucratic entity that will simply coordinate policies among relevant ministries?

The digital agency should become a strong organization which can function as a powerful control tower, with highly talented people gathering from both the public and private sectors, to lead the digitalization of the society as a whole, Suga said on Sept. 23 at a meeting of ministers involved in digital reform.

The government has created an office to prepare for the establishment of the agency, and unprecedented steps are being made, such as setting up an online platform to solicit opinions from the public.

But the success of the agency depends solely on whether it can indeed serve the role of a powerful control tower.

In order to achieve this goal, the agency should make its objective the digitalization of the Japanese society as a whole, and the agency should be positioned above other ministries and become a special zone for civil servants to secure human resources with cutting-edge skills and global perspectives.

First and foremost, the agency that will serve as the core of national cyberpower should aim at realizing digital transformation of Japanese society as a whole instead of limiting its role to integrating procurement of the ministries administrative systems.

Many industrialized nations have organizations similar to the digital agency, but their objectives and authorities differ.

The Government Digital Service, created in the United Kingdom in 2013 under Prime Minister David Camerons administration based on lessons learned from past failures regarding the governments systems procurement, is working progressively to digitalize administrative services under a thoroughly open and user-friendly approach, realizing agile development.

While the GDS can serve as a model for Japan in various aspects, its main role is limited to digitalizing government functions.

Some countries are trying to digitalize the whole society. In Singapore, for instance, the Smart Nation and Digital Government Office under the Prime Ministers Office works as the brains of the government to formulate policies in building a Smart Nation, including promoting cashless payments and use of digital data.

The Government Technology Agency implements the offices policies in cooperation with the private sector, as well as nurturing human resources adapting to the digital economy and providing digital tools for administrative services related to individuals and companies.

Putting aside the question of its surveillance society approach, Singapores digitalization reform provides a model for Japan in the sense that it is targeted at the whole society.

So what is the goal of Japans digital agency?

The Cabinet Secretariats National Strategy Office of Information and Communications Technology has been tackling the issue of different ministries operating systems with different specifications procured under different budget allocations.

But what is needed now is not only getting rid of the governments vertically segmented structure in terms of system designs or budgets, but also introducing meta-level strategic thinking and consolidating digital policies and plans which are currently conducted separately by ministries and agencies, such as the industry ministry working on industrial digitalization and cashless payments, the education ministry on digitalization of education, the internal affairs ministry on the My Number social security and tax number system, local governments on regional digitalization and so forth.

In particular, cybersecurity and data strategy will mean nothing unless they are consistent everywhere.

It is necessary for the government to build the architecture and infrastructure of a fundamental platform that will serve as digital public goods for the private sector to utilize to proceed with the digitalization of the whole society.

Sanjay Anandaram of iSPIRT, a nonprofit organization which has been developing the digital platform India Stack in India, likened digital platforms to roads.

End users use the services that have been built atop (the governments) digital platforms by private businesses and public entities, Sanjay said in an interview with G20 Japan Digital. Businesses can design and innovate new services for their customers and partners using these platforms.

In a sense, the platform is like roads. The state will construct them and anyone can design and deploy any vehicle to run on them following rules, he said. The users, the public, can use these vehicles (such services) and go where they want to go.

In order to strengthen the nations cyber power as a pillar of its growth strategy, it is necessary for the government to clearly aim at digitalizing the whole society in a blanket manner and construct strong roads.

Secondly, to realize such goals, the digital agency should be positioned above other ministries.

The National Security Secretariat, established in the Cabinet Secretariat by former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in 2014, is probably the latest example of a government entity succeeding in breaking down silos and securing effective coordination and planning authorities.

The secretariat has influence over other ministries as it is dedicated to the planning and coordination of basic direction and important matters of foreign and defense policies concerning Japans national security and because of its close relations with the government leadership, directly providing information to the prime minister and the chief Cabinet secretary.

But how can this be realized by a government agency?

Various new agencies were established following the restructuring and streamlining of government ministries and agencies conducted in the 1990s under Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimotos administration.

For instance, the Consumer Affairs Agency was created in 2009 as an organ affiliated with the Cabinet Office in order to focus on consumer issues which could not have been dealt with appropriately because they involved a number of ministries, such as choking accidents caused by mini-cup konjac jelly and food poisoning cases caused by frozen dumplings shipped from China.

The agency was regarded as a sweeping reform that would go down in history, launched by transferring related authorities and personnel from eight ministries and a commission the Cabinet Office, the Fair Trade Commission, the National Police Agency, the Financial Services Agency, the Internal Affairs and Communications Ministry, the Justice Ministry, the Health, Labor and Welfare Ministry, the Economy, Trade and Industry Ministry, and the Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism Ministry.

The Japan Tourism Agency, set up in 2008, also has as one of its goals the abolition of vertically-divided administrative functions to strengthen the governments tourism-boosting efforts under the leadership of the commissioner.

These agencies are positioned as affiliated organs of ministries.

Japans administrative system is structured in a way that ministries are positioned under the Cabinet Office, with agencies such as the Financial Services Agency, the Japan Sports Agency and the Japan Tourism Agency coming under different ministries.

However, there is one exception. The Reconstruction Agency is ranked as being the same as a ministry.

This is because the agency was not created as an affiliated organ of a ministry, but as a body under the direct control of the Cabinet on the basis of a law to establish such an agency, having an authority to plan and coordinate policies from a position above ministries.

The digital agency should be in a similar position. It could start small and grow big, but there is a danger of the agency remaining too compact.

In 2007, when the Defense Agency, which had been a subordinate body under the Cabinet Office, was given a ministry status, the government explained that the agency had already been working in the same way as government ministries, with its tasks expanding from management of the Self-Defense Forces to getting involved in policy planning for a variety of issues.

The digital agency should be engaged not only in the management of administrative systems but also in policy making, and should be positioned to demonstrate leadership over ministries from the beginning, with the potential to become a ministry in the future.

It is of course important where the digital agency will be positioned in the government, but more important is the people who will breathe life into the agency.

How should the agency be organized so that it can gather talented people from the private sector who will put their heart into digitalizing the nation for the coming era?

Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga (left) and digital reform minister Takuya Hirai launched an office established by the Cabinet Office and tasked with creating a digital agency, on Sept. 30. | POOL / VIA KYODO

Making the agency a special zone for civil servants so that people from the private sector can work there free from bureaucratic restraints is one idea.

In Japan, around 70% of the people working for the information technology industry are hired by IT vendors and the rest employed by IT user firms.

While roughly 60% of such people in Western countries including the United States and Germany are working for user companies, human resources in Japan are concentrated in companies that are entrusted with developing systems.

The number of university students specializing in data science is also relatively small in Japan, meaning the nation lacks a sufficient environment to nurture globally competitive specialists who can create added value on their own initiative.

When I conducted an interview survey on the IT industry in Japan for a year up to August, many pointed out that the seniority system of companies is resulting in few people experiencing project management when they are young.

At this moment, there are very few people in Japan who can design world-class IT architecture.

The digital agency should invite such people and provide them with an environment in which they can work to achieve their goals without feeling constrained to follow the rules and practices of bureaucrats.

The government should take the establishment of the agency as a golden opportunity to broaden the base of human resources in the IT industry and give such people the chance to work on the nations biggest project by utilizing cutting-edge technology in a free development environment.

By having a team of people who can develop and operate systems within the agency and eventually being able to send out talented people to the private sector, the digital agency can create a growth factor for the nation and for human resources development in the long term.

The digital agency should not be pie in the sky. Now is the time to establish an effective digital control tower with clear objectives, think of how to organize it and who to hire without compromising, so that Japan wont lose again in the global competition in an era of cyberpower.

Jun Mukoyama is a fellow at API. API Geoeconomic Briefing, provided by the Asia Pacific Initiative, an independent think tank based in Tokyo, is a series that looks into geopolitical and economic trends in the post-COVID-19 world, with a particular focus on technology and innovation, global supply chains, international rule-making and climate change.

In a time of both misinformation and too much information, quality journalism is more crucial than ever.By subscribing, you can help us get the story right.

PHOTO GALLERY (CLICK TO ENLARGE)

Read the rest here:

The need to digitalize Japanese society as a whole - The Japan Times

Posted in Abolition Of Work | Comments Off on The need to digitalize Japanese society as a whole – The Japan Times

Your Monthly Reminder That Nikki Haley Is A Social-Climbing Opportunist – The Federalist

Posted: at 2:56 pm

Nikki Haley is a social-climbing political opportunist whose most deeply held political belief is Nikki Haley.

This has been true since before she even entered the national consciousness, but she blessed us with a quick refresher course Thursday when she condemned President Donald Trump during a dinner speech to the Republican National Committees annual winter meeting.

Shes not alone in doing so. Corporate media swelled this week with Republicans who, like Haley, spent years working for the president (and were campaigning for him as recently as two months ago) and now are denouncing him with all their might.

Most of those resigning will advertise this as a brave decision. But its tough to pin a medal on spending the remaining two weeks of the presidents term trying out for a job on CNN (or at least a pardon from corporate recruiters), and it only gets tougher when compounded with the honest assessment that the same corporate media (and the Democrats they support) share a great deal of the blame with Trump for the events leading up to Wednesdays shameful and depressing riot.

But wanna-be President Haley isnt focused on such tiny ambitions, nor is this her first time earning quick points condemning Trump. The New York businessman is everything a governor doesnt want in a president, shed told a reporter before South Carolinas 2016 Republican presidential debate. She made sure to glare for the cameras when they came around for the big day.

But circumstances and opportunities change. This is why, two weeks before the 2016 election, Haley told reporters shed be voting for the Republican nominee even though his campaign was embarrassing and had turned [her] stomach upside down. Her decision, she publicly lamented, was not an easy one, despite it being precisely the easiest and safest decision available to a professional Republican who still wanted to be president someday.

Two weeks later, Trump won the election and Haley saw her opportunities shifting yet again. By the end of November, shed said shed accept his nomination to ambassador to the United Nations a job that gave her the foreign policy experience and spotlight she needed to keep her name in the running for future president.

But that wasnt all it got her: After shed left the administration, Haleys experience working for Trump won her $315,000 sitting on Boeings board. It was a step up from her previous hodgepodge of jobs in the private sector, where shed accepted inflated salaries from multiple companies. She was just a state senator back then, but the companies paying her salaries had business before her legislature. Its good to get ahead when youre Nikki Haley.

Those South Carolina paychecks eventually sparked an ethics investigation and a small fine in 2013, although by then she was governor. See, the Tea Party had come along, and sensing opportunity (!), Haley had set herself to reading a few Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman books, and traveled around the state quoting them to wealthy conservative donors.

Impressed with the young woman, they backed her all the way to the governors mansion, where her presidential ambitions began to shine as 1) the first female governor of South Carolina, 2) the youngest governor in the country, and 3) the second Indian governor in American history.

Her Tea Party honeymoon didnt last, however: Her tax breaks to major international companies undercutting local manufacturers didnt sit well with them. By 2016, then-Gov. Haleys much-lauded endorsement of Sen. Marco Rubio landed him 10 points behind Trump in her own state.

That doesnt mean shes down and out by any stretch. Its been a long road to the White House, and shes made all the safe decisions at every turn, with Thursdays speech just the latest detour. Circumstances and opportunities change quickly, after all. And so does Nikki Haley.

Continue reading here:

Your Monthly Reminder That Nikki Haley Is A Social-Climbing Opportunist - The Federalist

Posted in Federalist | Comments Off on Your Monthly Reminder That Nikki Haley Is A Social-Climbing Opportunist – The Federalist

Twitter Just Nuked The Account Of The World’s Biggest Critic Of Big Tech And China – The Federalist

Posted: at 2:56 pm

Twitter permanently banned President Donald Trump on Friday evening, claiming that the various interpretations of his recent tweets could pose a risk of further incitement of violence.

After close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the context around them specifically how they are being received and interpreted on and off Twitter we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement of violence, the big tech company statement read.

The big tech company previously threatened to ban the account if any future violations of the Twitter Rules, including our Civic Integrity or Violent Threats policies occurred.

Twitter further attempted to justify its censorship by claiming it is dedicated to granting the public access to elected officials and world leaders, but that no longer includes Trump.

Our public interest framework exists to enable the public to hear from elected officials and world leaders directly. It is built on a principle that the people have a right to hold power to account in the open, the statement continued. However, we made it clear going back years that these accounts are not above our rules entirely and cannot use Twitter to incite violence, among other things. We will continue to be transparent around our policies and their enforcement.

While the Iranian Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who glorifies violence on a regular basis, is allowed to stay on the big tech platform, and is even promoted by it, Trump will no longer be allowed an account with Twitter.

The big tech company has a history of censoring the president. In one of its most recent moves, Twitter locked the presidents account Wednesday after the company said his tweets violated its Civic Integrity policy. Shortly before the lock, the social media platform barred users from liking, replying to, or even retweeting the presidents video calling for peace after a mob attacked the Capitol.

The social media platform also made a point to label almost every one of the presidents posts about the election with a flag, disputing his claims about election integrity.

Jordan Davidson is a staff writer at The Federalist. She graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism.

More:

Twitter Just Nuked The Account Of The World's Biggest Critic Of Big Tech And China - The Federalist

Posted in Federalist | Comments Off on Twitter Just Nuked The Account Of The World’s Biggest Critic Of Big Tech And China – The Federalist

Georgia Confirms The Pre-Trump GOP Is Dead And Gone – The Federalist

Posted: at 2:56 pm

Amid the fallout from a stunning Republican loss in Georgia that effectively hands control of the U.S. Senate to Democrats, were already seeing commentary and think pieces about how this means the end of Trumpism, that Donald Trump killed the GOP, that Trump sabotaged his own party, and so on.

Not so fast. Yes, President Trump will leave office having served only one term, but consider where he will leave his party relative to his previous two predecessors. When George W. Bush left office, he left behind eight fewer GOP Senate seats and 21 fewer House seats. Democrats comfortably controlled the Congress and the White House, having made substantial gains in two consecutive elections, the 2006 midterms and the 2008 generalsomething no party had done since the 1930s.

By the time Barack Obama left office, his party had been decimated. Sure, Democrats gained two Senate seats and six House seats in 2016, but it wasnt anywhere close enough to make up for historic losses in the 2010 and 2014 midterms. In the latter, Republicans won the largest Senate majority for either party since 1980, while gains in the House gave the GOP its largest majority since 1928. All told, Obama oversaw the net loss of 12 Senate seats and 64 House seats.

On the state level, Obamas tenure was marked by the largest loss of power since Ike Eisenhower. When Obama took office in 2009, Democrats controlled both chambers in 27 states. When he left, it was only 13. Under Obama, Democrats lost 13 governorships and a total of 813 state legislative seats. Between the 2010 and 2014 midterms, Republicans gained control of 33 state legislatures.

By comparison, Trump is leaving his party in good shape. Yes, Democrats control the presidency, the House, and effectively control a split Senate. But Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosis majority is razor-thinand about to get thinner. President-elect Joe Biden has picked three Democratic House members to serve in his administration, which means Pelosi will have only a three-seat majority when the next Congress convenes.

Democrats failed to unseat a single House Republican in 2020 while losing Democratic incumbents nationwide. Democrats failed to gain control of a single state legislature, while Republicans netted about 60 state House seats and more than a dozen state Senate seats across the country. Democrats failed to gain any governorships, and in fact lost one in Montana, the only governorship to change party hands in 2020.

All of the above is of course relative. Trump didnt sabotage his party, but his victory in 2016 did signal the end of the GOP as we knew itnot because Trump was going to kill the Republican Party (as I suspected might happen when he won the partys nomination) but because his election meant the electorate had already changed, and profoundly.

Republican voters, along with millions of Independents and moderate Democrats, were fed up with an entrenched establishment beholden to a donor class whose interests conflicted with those of ordinary people. The chasm between these two groups was (and still is) especially obvious on issues like immigration, free trade, and foreign policy. For too long, Republican leaders paid lip service to what voters wanta secure border, protections for American workers, an end to foreign warswhile doing what the donors wanted.

Trump was in many ways the perfect candidate to channel these frustrations, which he did with aplomb and sincerity, given his long opposition to U.S. elite consensus on these issues. His 2016 victory underscored just how dead the old GOP consensus wasthe Cold War fusionism that kept otherwise disparate elements of the Republican coalition together. Once in office, resistance to his agenda from within the GOP establishment made these divisions even more visible.

What became clear, at least outside the corporate media echo-chamber, was that the old Republican Party was already deadhad been dead since before Trump came along. Trumps election offered the party new life and a new direction.

Instead of being beholden to a wealthy donor class and the exhausted ideas and slogans of the Reagan era, Republicans could embrace populism and become a right-of-center, multiracial, working-class party. Studies of the 2016 electorate indicated GOP voters were more economically liberal and socially conservative than anyone had thought, while Democrats were moving steadily to the left on both counts.

The question was, would Republican elites take up the gauntlet and try to transform their party along these lines? Some did, some didnt. The old guard, people like Sens. Mitch McConnell and Mitt Romney, didnt. A certain segment of the GOP establishment was never going to go along with a populist movement on the right, whether Trump was connected to it or not.

Indeed, as the dust settles from Georgia we are likely to hear again and again from establishment types who never supported Trump in the first place. They will say the loss of the Republican majority in the Senate, like the loss of the White House, is all Trumps fault, and that in fact the last four years of a Trumpist (that is, a populist) GOP was all a huge mistake.

But Trumps loss and the loss of the Senate, bad as it might seem for an emergent GOP populism, arent going to bring back the pre-Trump Republican status quo. Simply put, the failure of the Republican establishment was responsible for Trumps rise, and Trumps fall will not undo that decades-long failurenothing will. That party, such as it was, is gone forever.

See the original post here:

Georgia Confirms The Pre-Trump GOP Is Dead And Gone - The Federalist

Posted in Federalist | Comments Off on Georgia Confirms The Pre-Trump GOP Is Dead And Gone – The Federalist

New York Ends a Punishment That Traps People in Poverty – The Appeal

Posted: at 2:56 pm

Political Report

A new law will stop the suspension of drivers licenses when New Yorkers fail to pay fines, though the governor weakened the legislation before signing it.

On New Years Eve, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed into law a bill that will end the suspension of drivers licenses over a failure to pay a traffic ticket, a major win for economic and racial justice advocates who have long decried the practice. The law will also reinstate the licenses of hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers, many of whom have lost driving privileges because they cannot afford to pay their fines.

Suspending drivers licenses entrenches and punishes poverty by preventing people from driving to work, taking kids to school, or visiting their doctor during the COVID-19 pandemic. People who are stopped for driving on a suspended license face misdemeanor or felony charges, and arrests of people who cant afford to pay fines and fees inflate jail populations across the country.

This win is a significant step toward scaling back economic and racial inequality in New York, Katie Adamides, New York state director at the Fines and Fees Justice Center, said in a press statement about the new law. (Note: Jonathan Ben-Menachem, the author, was employed by the Fines and Fees Justice Center until July of 2020.) The law was sponsored by Assemblymember Pamela Hunter and Senator Timothy Kennedy.

Advocates are also warning, though, that New York needs to take many other steps if it aims to fight the criminalization of poverty, especially because Cuomo cut out an important part of the legislation before signing it.

After the 2008 recession and the wave of austerity that followed it, local tax revenues dropped and tax increases became less politically viable. As a result, jurisdictions increased the amounts of fines and fees, and they imposed them on more people in order to fund government services. Since fines and fees are not adjusted according to wealth, theyre an inherently regressive form of taxation, and cities with larger Black populations tend to rely more on fines to fund government.

When the 2014 police killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, led to a Department of Justice investigation that exposed the towns racist and extractive policing practices, efforts to reform fines and fees accelerated nationwide. In recent years, advocates have targeted drivers license suspensions.

With its new law, New York joins 10 states that have stopped suspending licenses for failure to pay court debt, according to the Fines and Fees Justice Center. Hawaii, Oregon, and Virginia adopted similar laws last year, and others have restricted license suspensions more narrowly as well. (New York, unlike other states, already did not suspend licenses over fines and fees related to criminal convictions as opposed to traffic violations.) Advocates are hoping to get other states such as Texas to join.

Studies undertaken in New York show that drivers license suspensions for unpaid fines and fees disproportionately target Black and low-income communities, as is true nationally.

According to data released by Driven By Justice, an advocacy coalition that supported the new law, New York ZIP codes with lower average incomes and fewer white residents tend to see dramatically more suspensions. In New York City, where driving on a suspended license is one of the most-charged crimes, 80 percent of all those who are arrested for this offense are Black or Latinx.

The inequitable impact traces back to the fact that Black and Latinx drivers are pulled over and ticketed at higher rates, making them more likely to accrue debt and have their license suspended. New York courts are among the most aggressive in the country when it comes to traffic tickets. In Buffalo, for example, police issue seven times as many tickets for tinted windows as they do for speeding; drivers even told the Investigative Post in 2019 that they had received a separate ticket for each tinted window. Those multi-ticket stops are most common in Black neighborhoods.

The new law does not eliminate all drivers license suspensions related to traffic tickets, however.

The bill that had initially passed the legislature would have also ended suspensions for a failure to appear in court for traffic hearings. But in late December, the governors office requested a chapter amendment, which the legislature agreed to, removing this provision.

In a memorandum explaining the carve-out, the governor wrote: Allowing drivers to simply ignore their tickets will inevitably allow for scofflaws to remain on the roads, and present a health and safety hazard to the public.

But a failure to appear in court is connected to poverty as well. People who cant pay a traffic ticket may also not be able to take time off work to go to court, or may be unable to arrange child care. Those who can afford it can pay off their fines without the need to show up in traffic court.

Drivers license suspensions for failure to appear only punish poor New Yorkers who cant afford to take time off of work to appear in court, Scott Levy, chief policy counsel at Bronx Defenders, told the Political Report. The state is shooting itself in the foot by not ending these suspensions for failure to appear. It means that thousands of people across New York will not get the benefit of being able to drive to work without the fear of being arrested.

Under the new law, people who miss their court appearance will be afforded a 90-day grace period before their license is suspended, and two notifications will be sent by mail or digital communication. The new law also imposes a moratorium on all criminal charges for driving on a suspended license (when the suspension stems from failure to pay or appear) between Jan. 1 and July 1, when the state will implement a new system to offer payment plans to people who cannot afford their traffic tickets.

The cumulative effect of drivers license suspensions in New York has been enormous. Between January 2016 and April 2018 alone, there were almost 1.7 million drivers license suspensions in New York for both nonpayment of traffic fines and non-appearance at traffic hearings.

The new law also still allows suspensions for nonpayment of fines and fees for drivers who violate vehicle height or weight restrictions. These account for less than 1 percent of tickets statewide and mainly impact drivers of large trucks and construction vehicles.

Beyond tickets and drivers license suspensions, advocates have pointed to a broad array of potential fines and fees reforms in New York. The No Price on Justice coalition is calling for the abolition of all state-imposed court fees, commissary garnishment for court debt, arrests and incarceration for nonpayment of fines, and mandatory minimum fines.

State lawmakers have introduced legislation to address several of the coalitions policy goals. In the last session, one bill would have abolished a wide range of court fees, including the mandatory surcharge attached to criminal convictions. It would have ended commissary garnishment and debtors prison practices, too. Another bill would have required all state prisons to provide free phone calls for incarcerated people for a minimum of 90 minutes per day; currently, incarcerated people must pay exorbitant sums that they often cannot afford in order to get in touch with their families. Its likely that these bills will be reintroduced in the 2021 session.

Democrats made legislative gains in New York in 2020, including securing a newly veto-proof majority, which may ease passage for progressive legislation in the upcoming session.

Some advocates hope that this new landscape will encourage politicians to take up even more ambitious transformations of the states fiscal policy.

For example, the state property tax capa policy long pursued by Governor Cuomoprohibits local governments other than New York City from raising property taxes by more than 2 percent each year. Municipalities that have few ways to raise revenue may then end up resorting to fines and fees. Abolishing the property tax cap would give municipalities another option.

While recent reforms like ending drivers license suspensions for unpaid traffic tickets are steps in the right direction, New York is long overdue for much broader fines and fees reform, Adamides, of the Fines and Fees Justice Center, told the Political Report. Until the state ends its reliance on fines and fees for revenue, we will continue to see the extreme harm that these regressive taxes cause to those least able to afford them.

This story has been updated to reflect the authors past employment with the Fines and Fees Justice Center.

Excerpt from:

New York Ends a Punishment That Traps People in Poverty - The Appeal

Posted in Abolition Of Work | Comments Off on New York Ends a Punishment That Traps People in Poverty – The Appeal

Listen To Rush Limbaugh On The Federalist’s Capitol Hill Coverage – The Federalist

Posted: at 2:56 pm

Listen to conservative radio icon Rush Limbaugh break down Federalist Publisher Ben Domenechs article The Consequences Of The Capitol Assault on his Friday show.

What will happen next is obvious, Domenech wrote in the piece published Thursday on Wednesdays riots.

A total crushing, anti-free speech effort that treats Trump-supporting groups like Branch Davidians. An effort to restore the fundamentally unserious neocons as the voice of reason in the room. A hardening of the bounds of the Peoples House to keep people away from politicians. A use of any levers of government power including audits, regulation, and lawfare to harass conservatives now categorized as seditionists and terrorists by the incoming president who falsely claims to want to unite the country. And above all, a doubling down on all the policies and efforts put in place to crush exactly the type of people who showed up at the Capitol yesterday in a foolish, desperate attempt to make themselves heard.

The rioters failed in their effort and ensured their marginalization. But marginalization doesnt mean evaporation. Theyre still here. Theyre still Americans. And theyre not going away. How our politicians handle that will dictate a lot about the next several years. And that shouldnt give people a lot of hope, considering that four years after his election and two weeks before his departure, the only person theyll apparently listen to is still Donald Trump.

Part one:

Part two:

Read the rest here:

Listen To Rush Limbaugh On The Federalist's Capitol Hill Coverage - The Federalist

Posted in Federalist | Comments Off on Listen To Rush Limbaugh On The Federalist’s Capitol Hill Coverage – The Federalist

The Capitol Riot Will Hurt The People Who Were Already Hurting Most – The Federalist

Posted: at 2:56 pm

WASHINGTON D.C. As protesters marched from the presidents speech to the Capitol on Wednesday, making the scenic journey down Constitution Avenue, I met a mild-mannered woman from the same small corner of Wisconsin in which I grew up. Shed never voted before Donald Trump ran for president. She traveled to the capital because she loves the president.

Not long after our conversation, hundreds of Trump supporters stormed the Capitol. They climbed the walls, pushed past police, and roamed the halls, destroying property and taking selfies. A 14-year Air Force veteran did not leave the building alive. It was a disgraceful sight.

There are those who believe Antifa showed up to incite chaos. Its possible such an attempt was made, but even if it was, there is simply no way around the fact that hundreds of Trump supporters broke into the Capitol.

Thousands more chose not to participate, leaving early or watching from a distance.From my vantage point on the east side of the Capitol, I saw genuine Trump supporters rushing up a staircase by the dozens, until the crowd was too dense to move. I saw a few urinate on trees just outside the building, barely shielded from women in the crowd.

I saw them climbing up the wall. Some chanted Whose house? Our house. Some chanted, Do your job! Antifa may have mixed into the fray, but to accurately diagnose this deep wound, its important to be crystal clear that Trump supporters rioted. Indeed, many were proud to do it. If youd rather not take my word for it, there is incontrovertible video evidence.

Ive been out talking to the protesters who busted into the Capitol, Washington Examiner reporter Susan Ferrechiotweeted. One thing Im hearing: They believed they had a right to be in a public building and did not expect cops to block their access (some were allowed in!) A subset of this group, they said, got out of control.

And so the blame game rages on. Rioting is the fault of rioters. But they had just been told by the president that a landslide election was being stolen from him.

Many people trust Donald Trump. They have been lied to by the media for years. They have been smeared as racists by elites and peers alike. With no other sources to turn to, they turn to the man who seems to hear them. He took advantage of that to lessen the blow of a narrow reelection loss.

Love him or hate him, it turns out Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., was right last week when he argued [t]he president and his allies are playing with fire. No senator believes Donald Trump defeated Joe Biden in a landslide. Many do, however, believe (and with good reason) that election irregularities occurred on a wider-than-acceptable scale.

The people I spoke to today, most of whom were at a total loss for who to trust in the media, believe the president. He told them a landslide win was being stolen. That would be a crisis. They acted as such. What did he expect?

For years now, Republicans have been pressed daily to strike a delicate balance, ignoring bad tweets to maintain a working relationship with a president beloved by many of their constituents. They had a reasonable argument for doing that. It pushed them to be more responsive to disenfranchised working-class voters. It gave them a seat at the table. But in the waning days of Trumps tenure, one of the worst-case scenarios of a loose-lipped president came to pass.

Some lawmakers and pundits will use it as an excuse to be more openly critical. Reasonable Conservatives will trip over themselves to prove their reasonableness. Some will continue with their fealty and others will pretend they never did.

This is not vindication for the pundits who warned repeatedly Trumps rhetoric was dangerous. Far from it. First, many conservatives who support his policy agenda abhor his rhetoric and say as much. Some downplay it to avoid making negotiations impossible.

But more than anything, its not vindication because such pundits harbor contempt for many of their decent, patriotic neighbors. They also excuse similar behavior on the left time and again. That, of course, does not vindicate anyone who stormed or cheered the storming of the Capitol either.

Our elites are corrupt. The political establishment is not serving us well. These wounds will not be healed by sanctimonious Instagram posts, cable news monologues, egghead Twitter threads, or lofty speeches on the Senate floor, applauded by Beltway journalists who just pocketed $2,000 bonuses and rarely worry about feeding their families.

In a sense, Wednesday will end in the same way it started, under a president known to be a flawed messenger for a deeply upset constituency.

The woman from Wisconsin who was kind enough to share her thoughts with me as she marched through the city volunteered that even she, a Trump diehard who traveled across the country for a midweek rally, wasnt always happy with everything he said. But like everyone else with whom I spoke, she eagerly insisted she would follow Trump straight into a third party.

It is the fault of the political class that Trumpor Bernie Sandersfeel like the only viable solutions to so many Americans. The Capitol riot will hurt the people who were already hurting most, the decent rally goers at a loss for answers, continually ignored and smeared, saddled with the baggage of violence they did not commit.

As the Capitol devolved into chaos, I overheard a protester walking away from the scene, down the hill on the east side Union Station, mutter about the political establishment to his friend. Its like theyre playing a game, he sighed, and everyone has a role to play but us.

Excerpt from:

The Capitol Riot Will Hurt The People Who Were Already Hurting Most - The Federalist

Posted in Federalist | Comments Off on The Capitol Riot Will Hurt The People Who Were Already Hurting Most – The Federalist