Daily Archives: February 1, 2022

I spent the past week in a more urban area and was shocked. I come from a semi-rural, conservative area, and as Rick Moran wrote Tuesday, COVID-19 hype scarcely exists. But in liberal land, masks, panic, and unnecessary mandatesabound.

Speaking of neurotic goons, theNew York Timesclaimed Tuesdaythat Omicron is a Dress Rehearsal for the Next Pandemic.

The next pandemic?

The Gray Lady neglects to mention that the best and most important news on omicron is that its killed almost no one.

At the worst, there are about 4,700 confirmed cases of the omicron variant in the United Kingdom, which has a socialist health care system. Omicron is now responsible for nearly half the cases in London a crowded left-wing locale and will likely become the dominant variant in the capital city later this week.

South African scientists announced the discovery of the omicron variant on Nov. 25. Since then, the country has had 230,000 COVID-19 cases, but fewer than 400 deaths, none resulting from omicron.

So death is minimal.

The study by South Africas largest health insurer of 211,000 positive coronavirus cases of which 78,000 were attributed to omicron showed that the risk of hospital admissions among adults was 30% lower than during the initial pandemic wave 21 months ago.

Omicron will spread fast,including in the U.S, but itll bemostly mild. The other good news is that omicron hasnt yet triggered a massive rush to Americas hospitals.

According to the Department of Health and Human Services, about three-quarters of the countrys hospital beds are being used,which is about the same rate as a month ago.

Just over 8% of hospital beds are being used by coronavirus patients when a month ago that figure was 7%. The percentage of the countrys ICU beds in use by COVID patients has increased, but only by 3%.

Once again, the states seeing the highest increase in COVID-19 hospitalizations are in the north, where the weather is cold and people are spending more time indoors.

In the past two weeks, Connecticut, Delaware,Minnesota, New Jersey, Rhode Island,Vermont, and Washington, D.C., have seen large increases in COVID-19 hospitalizations.

Meanwhile, eight states have seen their hospitalizations decrease the past fortnight, including Alaska, Montana, and North Dakota, which are red states with even colder weather, so why are they seeing a decrease?

Related: Omicron May Have Been Around for Awhile

In the end, no matter whatJoe BidenorRochelle Walensky argue,the dynamics of the pandemic have not changed; if youre elderly, immunocompromised, or have comorbidities, you have a higher risk of having a tough time fighting off the virus.

If youre young and healthy, youre probably going to be fine. And dont forget about natural immunity, where there is big news today from Israel: natural immunity still surpasses immunity from a vaccine.

Here is the original post:

Omicron is not killing people PJ Media

American fiscally conservative political movement

The Tea Party movement was an American fiscally conservative political movement within the Republican Party. Members of the movement called for lower taxes and for a reduction of the national debt and federal budget deficit through decreased government spending.[1][2] The movement supported small-government principles[3][4] and opposed government-sponsored universal healthcare.[5] The Tea Party movement has been described as a popular constitutional movement[6] composed of a mixture of libertarian,[7] right-wing populist,[8] and conservative activism.[9] It has sponsored multiple protests and supported various political candidates since 2009.[10][11][12] According to the American Enterprise Institute, various polls in 2013 estimated that slightly over 10 percent of Americans identified as part of the movement.[13]

The Tea Party movement was popularly launched following a February 19, 2009 call by CNBC reporter Rick Santelli on the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange for a "tea party".[14][15] Several conservative activists agreed by conference call to coalesce against President Barack Obama's agenda and scheduled a series of protests.[16][17] Supporters of the movement subsequently had a major impact on the internal politics of the Republican Party. Although the Tea Party is not a political party in the classic sense of the word, some research suggests that members of the Tea Party Caucus vote like a significantly farther right third party in Congress.[18] A major force behind it was Americans for Prosperity (AFP), a conservative political advocacy group founded by businessman and political activist David Koch. It is unclear exactly how much money is donated to AFP by David and his brother Charles Koch.[19] By 2019, it was reported that the conservative wing of the Republican Party "has basically shed the tea party moniker."[20]

The movement's name refers to the Boston Tea Party of December 16, 1773, a watershed event in the launch of the American Revolution. The 1773 event demonstrated against taxation by the British government without political representation for the American colonists, and references to the Boston Tea Party and even costumes from the 1770s era are commonly heard and seen in the Tea Party movement.[21]

The Tea Party movement focuses on a significant reduction in the size and scope of the government.[3] The movement advocates a national economy operating without government oversight.[22] Movement goals include limiting the size of the federal government, reducing government spending, lowering the national debt and opposing tax increases.[23] To this end, Tea Party groups have protested the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), stimulus programs such as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA, commonly referred to as the Stimulus or The Recovery Act), cap and trade environmental regulations, health care reform such as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA, also known simply as the Affordable Care Act or "Obamacare") and perceived attacks by the federal government on their 1st, 2nd, 4th and 10th Amendment rights.[24] Tea Party groups have also voiced support for right to work legislation as well as tighter border security, and opposed amnesty for illegal immigrants.[25][26] On the federal health care reform law, they began to work at the state level to nullify the law, after the Republican Party lost seats in Congress and the Presidency in the 2012 elections.[27][28] It has also mobilized locally against the United Nations Agenda 21.[27][29] They have protested the IRS for controversial treatment of groups with "tea party" in their names.[30] They have formed Super PACs to support candidates sympathetic to their goals and have opposed what they call the "Republican establishment" candidates.

The Tea Party does not have a single uniform agenda. The decentralized character of the Tea Party, with its lack of formal structure or hierarchy, allows each autonomous group to set its own priorities and goals. Goals may conflict, and priorities will often differ between groups. Many Tea Party organizers see this as a strength rather than a weakness, as decentralization has helped to immunize the Tea Party against co-opting by outside entities and corruption from within.[31]

Even though the groups participating in the movement have a wide range of different goals, the Tea Party places its view of the Constitution at the center of its reform agenda.[23][32][33] It urges the return of government as intended by some of the Founding Fathers. It also seeks to teach its view of the Constitution and other founding documents.[31] Scholars have described its interpretation variously as originalist, popular,[34] or a unique combination of the two.[32][35] Reliance on the Constitution is selective and inconsistent. Adherents cite it, yet do so more as a cultural reference rather than out of commitment to the text, which they seek to alter.[36][37][38] Two constitutional amendments have been targeted by some in the movement for full or partial repeal: the 16th that allows an income tax, and the 17th that requires popular election of senators. There has also been support for a proposed Repeal Amendment, which would enable a two-thirds majority of the states to repeal federal laws, and a Balanced Budget Amendment, to limit deficit spending.[23]

The Tea Party has sought to avoid placing emphasis on traditional conservative social issues. National Tea Party organizations, such as the Tea Party Patriots and FreedomWorks, have expressed concern that engaging in social issues would be divisive.[31] Instead, they have sought to have activists focus their efforts away from social issues and focus on economic and limited government issues.[39][40][41] Still, many groups like Glenn Beck's 9/12 Tea Parties, TeaParty.org, the Iowa Tea Party and Delaware Patriot Organizations do act on social issues such as abortion, gun control, prayer in schools, and illegal immigration.[39][40][42]

One attempt at forming a list of what Tea Partiers wanted Congress to do resulted in the Contract from America. It was a legislative agenda created by conservative activist Ryan Hecker with the assistance of Dick Armey of FreedomWorks. Armey had co-written with Newt Gingrich the previous Contract with America released by the Republican Party during the 1994 midterm elections. One thousand agenda ideas that had been submitted were narrowed down to twenty-one non-social issues. Participants then voted in an online campaign in which they were asked to select their favorite policy planks. The results were released as a ten-point Tea Party platform.[43][44] The Contract from America was met with some support within the Republican Party, but it was not broadly embraced by GOP leadership, which released its own 'Pledge to America'.[44]

In the aftermath of the 2012 American elections, some Tea Party activists have taken up more traditionally populist ideological viewpoints on issues that are distinct from general conservative views. Examples are various Tea Party demonstrators sometimes coming out in favor of U.S. immigration reform as well as for raising the U.S. minimum wage.[45][dead link]

Historian and writer Walter Russell Mead analyzes the foreign policy views of the Tea Party movement in a 2011 essay published in Foreign Affairs. Mead says that Jacksonian populists, such as the Tea Party, combine a belief in American exceptionalism and its role in the world with skepticism of American's "ability to create a liberal world order". When necessary, they favor 'total war' and unconditional surrender over "limited wars for limited goals". Mead identifies two main trends, one personified by former Texas Congressman Ron Paul and the other by former Governor of Alaska Sarah Palin. "Paulites" have a Jeffersonian approach that seeks to avoid foreign military involvement. "Palinites", while seeking to avoid being drawn into unnecessary conflicts, favor a more aggressive response to maintaining America's primacy in international relations. Mead says that both groups share a distaste for "liberal internationalism".[46]

Some Tea Party-affiliated Republicans, such as Michele Bachmann, Jeff Duncan, Connie Mack IV, Jeff Flake, Tim Scott, Joe Walsh, Allen West, and Jason Chaffetz, voted for progressive Congressman Dennis Kucinich's resolution to withdraw U.S. military personnel from Libya.[47] In the Senate, three Tea Party backed Republicans, Jim DeMint, Mike Lee and Michael Crapo, voted to limit foreign aid to Libya, Pakistan and Egypt.[48] Tea Partiers in both houses of Congress have shown willingness to cut foreign aid. Most leading figures within the Tea Party both within and outside Congress opposed military intervention in Syria.[49][50]

The Tea Party movement is composed of a loose affiliation of national and local groups that determine their own platforms and agendas without central leadership. The Tea Party movement has both been cited as an example of grassroots political activity and has also been described as an example of corporate-funded activity made to appear as spontaneous community action, a practice known as "astroturfing."[51][52][53][54][55][56][57] Other observers see the organization as having its grassroots element "amplified by the right-wing media", supported by elite funding.[36][58]

The Tea Party movement is not a national political party; polls show that most Tea Partiers consider themselves to be Republicans[59][60] and the movement's supporters have tended to endorse Republican candidates.[61] Commentators, including Gallup editor-in-chief Frank Newport, have suggested that the movement is not a new political group but simply a re-branding of traditional Republican candidates and policies.[59][62][63] An October 2010 Washington Post canvass of local Tea Party organizers found 87% saying "dissatisfaction with mainstream Republican Party leaders" was "an important factor in the support the group has received so far".[64]

Tea Party activists have expressed support for Republican politicians Sarah Palin, Dick Armey, Michele Bachmann, Marco Rubio, and Ted Cruz.[citation needed] In July 2010, Bachmann formed the Tea Party Congressional Caucus;[65] however, since July 16, 2012, the caucus has been defunct.[66] An article in Politico reported that many Tea Party activists were skeptical of the caucus, seeing it as an effort by the Republican Party to hijack the movement. Utah congressman Jason Chaffetz refused to join the caucus, saying

Structure and formality are the exact opposite of what the Tea Party is, and if there is an attempt to put structure and formality around it, or to co-opt it by Washington, D.C., it's going to take away from the free-flowing nature of the true Tea Party movement.[67]

The name "Tea Party" is a reference to the Boston Tea Party, a protest in 1773 by colonists who objected to British taxation without representation, and demonstrated by dumping British tea taken from docked ships into the harbor. The event was one of the first in a series that led to the United States Declaration of Independence and the American Revolution that gave birth to American independence.[68] Some commentators have referred to the Tea in "Tea Party" as the backronym "Taxed Enough Already", though this did not appear until months after the first nationwide protests.[69][70]

References to the Boston Tea Party were part of Tax Day protests held in the 1990s and before.[21][72][73][74] In 1984, David H. Koch and Charles G. Koch of Koch Industries founded Citizens for a Sound Economy (CSE), a conservative political group whose self-described mission was "to fight for less government, lower taxes, and less regulation." Congressman Ron Paul was appointed as the first chairman of the organization. The CSE lobbied for policies favorable to corporations, particularly tobacco companies.[75]

In 2002, a Tea Party website was designed and published by the CSE at web address http://www.usteaparty.com, and stated "our US Tea Party is a national event, hosted continuously online and open to all Americans who feel our taxes are too high and the tax code is too complicated."[76][77] The site did not take off at the time.[78] In 2003, Dick Armey became the chairman of CSE after retiring from Congress.[79] In 2004, Citizens for a Sound Economy split into FreedomWorks, for 501c4 advocacy activity, and the Americans for Prosperity Foundation. Dick Armey stayed as chairman of FreedomWorks, while David Koch stayed as Chairman of the Americans for Prosperity Foundation. The two organizations would become key players in the Tea Party movement from 2009 onward.[80][81] Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks were "probably the leading partners" in the September 2009 Taxpayer March on Washington, also known as the "9/12 Tea Party," according to The Guardian.[82]

Fox News Channel commentator Juan Williams has said that the Tea Party movement emerged from the "ashes" of Ron Paul's 2008 presidential primary campaign.[83] Indeed, Ron Paul has stated that its origin was on December 16, 2007, when supporters held a 24-hour record breaking, "moneybomb" fundraising event on the Boston Tea Party's 234th anniversary,[84] but that others, including Republicans, took over and changed some of the movement's core beliefs.[85][86] Writing for Slate.com, Dave Weigel has argued in concurrence that, in his view, the "first modern Tea Party events occurred in December 2007, long before Barack Obama took office, and they were organized by supporters of Rep. Ron Paul," with the movement expanding and gaining prominence in 2009.[63] Barack Obama, the first African American President of the United States, took office in January 2009. Journalist Joshua Green has stated in The Atlantic that while Ron Paul is not the Tea Party's founder, or its culturally resonant figure, he has become the "intellectual godfather" of the movement since many now agree with his long-held beliefs.[87]

Journalist Jane Mayer has said that the Koch brothers were essential in funding and strengthening the movement, through groups such as Americans for Prosperity.[81] In 2013, a study published in the journal Tobacco Control concluded that organizations within the movement were connected with non-profit organizations that the tobacco industry and other corporate interests worked with and provided funding for,[76][88] including the group Citizens for a Sound Economy.[89] Al Gore cited the study and said that the connections between "market fundamentalists", the tobacco industry and the Tea Party could be traced to a 1971 memo from tobacco lawyer Lewis F. Powell, Jr. who advocated more political power for corporations. Gore said that the Tea Party is an extension of this political strategy "to promote corporate profit at the expense of the public good."[90]

Former governor of Alaska and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, keynoting a Tea Party Tax Day protest at the state capital in Madison, Wisconsin on April 15, 2011, reflected on the origins of the Tea Party movement and credited President Barack Obama, saying "And speaking of President Obama, I think we ought to pay tribute to him today at this Tax Day Tea Party because really he's the inspiration for why we're here today. That's right. The Tea Party Movement wouldn't exist without Barack Obama."[91][92]

On January 24, 2009, Trevor Leach, chairman of the Young Americans for Liberty in New York State, organized the Binghamton Tea Party, to protest obesity taxes proposed by New York Governor David Paterson and call for fiscal responsibility on the part of the government.[95] The protestors emptied bottles of soda into the Susquehanna River, and several of them wore Native American headdresses, similar to the band of 18th century colonists who dumped tea in Boston Harbor to express outrage about British taxes.[96]

Some of the protests were partially in response to several federal laws: the Bush administration's Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008,[97] and the Obama administration's economic stimulus package the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009[98][99] and healthcare reform legislation.[100]

New York Times journalist Kate Zernike reported that leaders within the Tea Party credit Seattle blogger and conservative activist Keli Carender with organizing the first Tea Party in February 2009, although the term "Tea Party" was not used.[101] Other articles, written by Chris Good of The Atlantic[102] and NPR's Martin Kaste,[103] credit Carender as "one of the first" Tea Party organizers and state that she "organized some of the earliest Tea Party-style protests".

Carender first organized what she called a "Porkulus Protest" in Seattle on Presidents Day, February 16, the day before President Barack Obama signed the stimulus bill into law.[104] Carender said she did it without support from outside groups or city officials. "I just got fed up and planned it." Carender said 120 people participated. "Which is amazing for the bluest of blue cities I live in, and on only four days notice! This was due to me spending the entire four days calling and emailing every person, think tank, policy center, university professors (that were sympathetic), etc. in town, and not stopping until the day came."[101][105]

Contacted by Carender, Steve Beren promoted the event on his blog four days before the protest[106] and agreed to be a speaker at the rally.[107] Carender also contacted conservative author and Fox News Channel contributor Michelle Malkin, and asked her to publicize the rally on her blog, which Malkin did the day before the event.[108] The following day, the Colorado branch of Americans for Prosperity held a protest at the Colorado Capitol, also promoted by Malkin.[109] Carender held a second protest on February 27, 2009, reporting "We more than doubled our attendance at this one."[101]

On February 18, 2009, the one-month old Obama administration announced the Homeowners Affordability and Stability Plan, an economic recovery plan to help home owners avoid foreclosure by refinancing mortgages in the wake of the Great Recession. The next day, CNBC business news editor Rick Santelli criticized the Plan in a live broadcast from the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. He said that those plans were "promoting bad behavior" by "subsidizing losers' mortgages". He suggested holding a tea party for traders to gather and dump the derivatives in the Chicago River on July 1. "President Obama, are you listening?" he asked.[110][111][112][113][114] A number of the floor traders around him cheered on his proposal, to the amusement of the hosts in the studio. Santelli's "rant" became a viral video after being featured on the Drudge Report.[115]

According to The New Yorker writer Ben McGrath and New York Times reporter Kate Zernike, this is where the movement was first inspired to coalesce under the collective banner of "Tea Party."[101][110] Santelli's remarks "set the fuse to the modern anti-Obama Tea Party movement," according to journalist Lee Fang.[93] About 10 hours after Santelli's remarks, reTeaParty.com was bought to coordinate Tea Parties scheduled for Independence Day and, as of March 4, was reported to be receiving 11,000 visitors a day.[116] Within hours, the conservative political advocacy group Americans for Prosperity registered the domain name "TaxDayTeaParty.com," and launched a website calling for protests against Obama.[93] Overnight, websites such as "ChicagoTeaParty.com" (registered in August 2008 by Chicagoan Zack Christenson, radio producer for conservative talk show host Milt Rosenberg) were live within 12 hours.[116] By the next day, guests on Fox News had already begun to mention this new "Tea Party."[117] As reported by The Huffington Post, a Facebook page was developed on February 20 calling for Tea Party protests across the country.[118]

A "Nationwide Chicago Tea Party" protest was coordinated across more than 40 different cities for February 27, 2009, thus establishing the first national modern Tea Party protest.[119][120] The movement has been supported nationally by at least 12 prominent individuals and their associated organizations.[121] Fox News called many of the protests in 2009 "FNC Tax Day Tea Parties" which it promoted on air and sent speakers to.[122][123] This was to include then-host Glenn Beck, though Fox came to discourage him from attending later events.[124]

Opposition to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) has been consistent within the Tea Party movement.[100] The scheme has often been referred to as 'Obamacare' by critics, but was soon adopted as well by many of its advocates, including President Obama. This has been an aspect of an overall anti-government message throughout Tea Party rhetoric that includes opposition to gun control measures and to federal spending increases.[45]

Activism by Tea Party people against the major health-care reform law from 2009 to 2014 has, according to the Kansas City Star, focused on pushing for Congressional victories so that a repeal measure would pass both houses and that President Obama's veto could be overridden. Some conservative public officials and commentators such as columnist Ramesh Ponnuru have criticized these views as completely unrealistic with the chances of overriding a Presidential veto being slim, with Ponnuru stating that "If you have in 2017 a Republican government... and it doesn't get rid of Obamacare, then I think that is a huge political disaster".[45]

Aside from rallies, some groups affiliated with the Tea Party movement began to focus on getting out the vote and ground game efforts on behalf of candidates supportive of their agenda starting in the 2010 elections.

Various Tea Party groups have endorsed candidates in the elections. In the 2010 midterm elections, The New York Times identified 138 candidates for Congress with significant Tea Party support, and reported that all of them were running as Republicansof whom 129 were running for the House and 9 for the Senate.[125] A poll by The Wall Street Journal and NBC News in mid October showed 35% of likely voters were Tea-party supporters, and they favored the Republicans by 84% to 10%.[126] The first Tea Party affiliated candidate to be elected into office is believed to be Dean Murray, a Long Island businessman, who won a special election for a New York State Assembly seat in February 2010.[127]

According to statistics on an NBC blog, overall, 32% of the candidates that were backed by the Tea Party or identified themselves as a Tea Party member won election. Tea Party supported candidates won 5 of 10 Senate races (50%) contested, and 40 of 130 House races (31%) contested.[128] In the primaries for Colorado, Nevada and Delaware the Tea-party backed Senate Republican nominees defeated "establishment" Republicans that had been expected to win their respective Senate races, but went on to lose in the general election to their Democratic opponents.[129]

The Tea Party is generally associated with the Republican Party.[130] Most politicians with the "Tea Party brand" have run as Republicans. In recent elections in the 2010s, Republican primaries have been the site of competitions between the more conservative, Tea Party wing of the party and the more moderate, establishment wing of the party. The Tea Party has incorporated various conservative internal factions of the Republican Party to become a major force within the party.[131][132]

Tea Party candidates were less successful in the 2012 election, winning four of 16 Senate races contested, and losing approximately 20% of the seats in the House that had been gained in 2010. Tea Party Caucus founder Michele Bachmann was re-elected to the House by a narrow margin.[133]

A May 2014 Kansas City Star article remarked about the Tea Party movement post-2012, "Tea party candidates are often inexperienced and sometimes underfunded. More traditional Republicanshungry for a winare emphasizing electability over philosophy, particularly after high-profile losses in 2012. Some in the GOP have made that strategy explicit."[45]

In June 2014, Tea Party favorite Dave Brat unseated the sitting GOP House Majority Leader Eric Cantor. Brat had previously been known as an economist and a professor at RandolphMacon College, running a grassroots conservative campaign that espoused greater fiscal restraint and his Milton Friedman-based viewpoints.[134] Brat has since won the seat by a comfortable margin until losing his reelection in 2018.

In November 2014, Tim Scott became the first African-American member of the U.S. Senate from the South since the reconstruction era, winning the South Carolina seat formerly held by Jim DeMint in a special election.[135]

In the 2014 elections in Texas, the Tea Party made large gains, with numerous Tea Party favorites being elected into office, including Dan Patrick as Lieutenant Governor[136][137] and Ken Paxton as Attorney General,[136][138] in addition to numerous other candidates.[138]

In the 2015 Kentucky gubernatorial election, Matt Bevin, a Tea Party favorite who challenged Mitch McConnell in the Republican primary in the 2014 Kentucky Senate election,[139] won with over 52% of the vote, despite fears that he was too extreme for the state.[140][141][142] Bevin is the second Republican in 44 years to be Governor of Kentucky.[140]

In May 2013, the Associated Press and The New York Times reported that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) flagged Tea Party groups and other conservative groups for review of their applications for tax-exempt status during the 2012 election. This led to both political and public condemnation of the agency, and triggered multiple investigations.[143]

Some groups were asked for donor lists, which is usually a violation of IRS policy. Groups were also asked for details about family members and about their postings on social networking sites. Lois Lerner, head of the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt groups, apologized on behalf of the IRS and stated, "That was wrong. That was absolutely incorrect, it was insensitive and it was inappropriate."[144][145] Testifying before Congress in March 2012, IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman denied that the groups were being targeted based on their political views.[144][145]

Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah, the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, rejected the apology as insufficient, demanding "ironclad guarantees from the I.R.S. that it will adopt significant protocols to ensure this kind of harassment of groups that have a constitutional right to express their own views never happens again."[145]

The resulting Senate subcommittee report ultimately found there had been "no bias", though Republican committee members filed a dissenting report.[146] According to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, 18% of the conservative groups that had Tea Party or other related terms in their names flagged for extra scrutiny by the IRS had no evidence of political activity.[147] Michael Hiltzik, writing in the Los Angeles Times, stated that evidence put forth in the House report indicated the IRS had been struggling to apply complicated new rules to nonprofits that may have been involved in political activity, and had also flagged liberal-sounding groups.[148] Of all the groups flagged, the only one to lose tax exempt status was a group that trains Democratic women to run for office.[149]

After a two-year investigation, the Justice Department announced in October 2015 that "We found no evidence that any IRS official acted based on political, discriminatory, corrupt, or other inappropriate motives that would support a criminal prosecution."[150]

On October 25, 2017, the Trump Administration settled with a Consent Order for the case Linchpins of Liberty v. United States; the IRS consented to express "its sincere apology" for singling out the plaintiff for aggressive scrutiny, stating, "The IRS admits that its treatment of Plaintiffs during the tax-exempt determinations process, including screening their applications based on their names or policy positions, subjecting those applications to heightened scrutiny and inordinate delays, and demanding of some Plaintiffs' information that TIGTA determined was unnecessary to the agency's determination of their tax-exempt status, was wrong. For such treatment, the IRS expresses its sincere apology." That same month, the Treasury Department's inspector general reported that the I.R.S. had also targeted liberal groups, flagging organization names with terms that included "Progressive" and "Occupy."[151][152]

President Donald Trump praised the Tea Party movement throughout his 2016 campaign.[153] In August 2015, he told a Tea Party gathering in Nashville that "The tea party people are incredible people. These are people who work hard and love the country and they get beat up all the time by the media."[153] In a January 2016 CNN poll at the beginning of the 2016 Republican primary, Trump led all Republican candidates modestly among self-identified Tea Party voters with 37 percent supporting Trump and 34 percent supporting Ted Cruz.[154]

Several commentators, including Jonathan Chait,[155] Jenny Beth Martin,[156][157] and Sarah Palin, argued that the Tea Party played a key role in the election of Donald Trump as the Republican Party presidential nominee, and eventually as U.S. president, and that Trump's election was even the culmination of the Tea Party and anti-establishment dissatisfaction associated with it. Martin stated after the election that "with the victory of Donald Trump, the values and principles that gave rise to the tea party movement in 2009 are finally gaining the top seat of power in the White House."[157]

On the other hand, other commentators, including Paul H. Jossey,[158] a conservative campaign finance attorney, and Jim Geraghty of the conservative National Review,[159] believed that the Tea Party to be dead or in decline. Jossey, for example, argued that the Tea Party "began as an organic, policy-driven grass-roots movement" but was ultimately "drained of its vitality and resources by national political action committees that dunned the movement's true believers endlessly for money to support its candidates and causes."[158]

This section needs to be updated. Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (June 2018)

Tea Party activities began to decline in 2010.[160][161] According to Harvard professor Theda Skocpol, the number of Tea Party chapters across the country slipped from about 1,000 to 600 between 2009 and 2012, but that this is still "a very good survival rate." Mostly, Tea Party organizations are said to have shifted away from national demonstrations to local issues.[160] A shift in the operational approach used by the Tea Party has also affected the movement's visibility, with chapters placing more emphasis on the mechanics of policy and getting candidates elected rather than staging public events.[162][163]

The Tea Party's involvement in the 2012 GOP presidential primaries was minimal, owing to divisions over whom to endorse as well as lack of enthusiasm for all the candidates.[161] However, the 2012 GOP ticket did have an influence on the Tea Party: following the selection of Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney's vice-presidential running mate, The New York Times declared that the once fringe of the conservative coalition, Tea Party lawmakers are now "indisputably at the core of the modern Republican Party."[164]

Though the Tea Party has had a large influence on the Republican Party, it has attracted major criticism by public figures within the Republican coalition as well. Then-Speaker of the House John Boehner particularly condemned many Tea Party-connected politicians for their behavior during the 2013 U.S. debt ceiling crisis. "I think they're misleading their followers," Boehner was publicly quoted as saying, "They're pushing our members in places where they don't want to be, and frankly I just think that they've lost all credibility." In the words of The Kansas City Star, Boehner "stamped out Tea Party resistance to extending the debt ceiling... worried that his party's prospects would be damaged by adherence to the Tea Party's preference for default".[45]

One 2013 survey found that, in political terms, 20% of self-identified Republicans stated that they considered themselves as part of the Tea Party movement.[165] Tea Party members rallied at the U.S. Capitol on February 27, 2014; their demonstrations celebrated the fifth anniversary of the movement coming together.[13]

By 2016, Politico noted that the Tea Party movement was essentially completely dead; however, the article noted that the movement seemed to die in part because some of its ideas had been absorbed by the mainstream Republican Party.[166] By 2019, it was reported that the conservative wing of the Republican Party "has basically shed the tea party moniker."[20]

Several polls have been conducted on the demographics of the movement. Though the various polls sometimes turn up slightly different results, they tend to show that Tea Party supporters tend more likely, than Americans overall, to be white, male, married, older than 45, regularly attending religious services, conservative, and to be more wealthy and have more education.[167][168][169][170][171] Broadly speaking, multiple surveys have found between 10% and 30% of Americans identify as a member of the Tea Party movement.[13][172] Most Republicans and 20% of Democrats support the movement according to one Washington PostABC News poll.[173]

According to The Atlantic, the three main groups that provide guidance and organization for the protests, FreedomWorks, dontGO, and Americans for Prosperity, state that the demonstrations are an organic movement.[174] Law professor and commentator Glenn Reynolds, best known as author of the Instapundit political blog, said in the New York Post that: "These aren't the usual semiprofessional protesters who attend antiwar and pro-union marches. These are people with real jobs; most have never attended a protest march before. They represent a kind of energy that our politics hasn't seen lately, and an influx of new activists."[175] Conservative political strategist Tim Phillips, now head of Americans for Prosperity, has remarked that the Republican Party is "too disorganized and unsure of itself to pull this off".[176]

The Christian Science Monitor has reported that Tea Party activists "have been called neo-Klansmen and knuckle-dragging hillbillies", adding that "demonizing tea party activists tends to energize the Democrats' left-of-center base" and that "polls suggest that tea party activists are not only more mainstream than many critics suggest",[177] but that a majority of them are women, not angry white men.[177][178][179] The article quoted Juan Williams as saying that the Tea Party's opposition to health reform was based on self-interest rather than racism.[177]

A Gallup poll conducted in March 2010 found thatother than gender, income and politicsself-described Tea Party members were demographically similar to the population as a whole.[180] A 2014 article from Forbes.com stated that the Tea Party's membership appears reminiscent of the people who supported independent Ross Perot's presidential campaigns in the 1990s.[13]

When surveying supporters or participants of the Tea Party movement, polls have shown that they are to a very great extent more likely to be registered Republican, have a favorable opinion of the Republican Party and an unfavorable opinion of the Democratic Party.[171][181][182]The Bloomberg National Poll of adults 18 and over showed that 40% of Tea Party supporters are 55 or older, compared with 32% of all poll respondents; 79% are white, 61% are men and 44% identify as "born-again Christians",[183] compared with 75%,[184] 48.5%,[185] and 34%[186] for the general population, respectively.

According to Susan Page and Naomi Jagoda of USA Today in 2010, the Tea Party was more "a frustrated state of mind" than "a classic political movement".[187] Tea party members "are more likely to be married and a bit older than the nation as a whole".[187] They are predominantly white, but other groups make up just under one-fourth of their ranks.[187] They believe that the federal government has become too large and powerful.[187] Surveys of Republican primary voters in the South in 2012 show that Tea Party supporters were not driven by racial animosity. Instead there was a strong positive relationship with religious evangelicalism. Tea Party supporters were older, male, poorer, more ideologically conservative, and more partisan than their fellow Republicans.[188]

Each of those factors is associated among Republicans with being more racially conservative. Using multiple regression techniques and a very large sample of N=100,000 the authors hold all the background factors statistically constant. When that happens, the tea party Republicans and other Republicans are practically identical on racial issues.[189] In contrast, a 2015 study found that racial resentment was one of the strongest predictors for Tea Party Movement membership.[190]

An October 2010 Washington Post canvass of local Tea Party organizers found 99% said "concern about the economy" was an "important factor".[64] Various polls have also probed Tea Party supporters for their views on a variety of political and controversial issues. On the question of whether they think their own income taxes this year are fair, 52% of Tea Party supporters told pollsters for CBS/New York Times that they were, versus 62% in the general population (including Tea Party supporters).[181] A Bloomberg News poll found that Tea Partiers are not against increased government action in all cases. "The ideas that find nearly universal agreement among Tea Party supporters are rather vague," says J. Ann Selzer, the pollster who created the survey. "You would think any idea that involves more government action would be anathema, and that is just not the case."

In advance of a new edition of their book American Grace, political scientists David E. Campbell of Notre Dame and Robert D. Putnam of Harvard published in a The New York Times opinion the results of their research into the political attitudes and background of Tea Party supporters. Using a pre-Tea Party poll in 2006 and going back to the same respondents in 2011, they found the supporters to be not "nonpartisan political neophytes" as often described, but largely "overwhelmingly partisan Republicans" who were politically active prior to the Tea Party. The survey found Tea Party supporters "no more likely than anyone else" to have suffered hardship during the 20072010 recession. Additionally, the respondents were more concerned about "putting God in government" than with trying to shrink government.[191][192]

The 2010 midterm elections demonstrated considerable skepticism within the Tea Party movement with respect to the dangers and the reality of global warming. A New York Times/CBS News Poll during the election revealed that only a small percentage of Tea Party supporters considered global warming a serious problem, much less than the portion of the general public that does. The Tea Party is strongly opposed to government-imposed limits on carbon dioxide emissions as part of emissions trading legislation to encourage use of fuels that emit less carbon dioxide.[193] An example is the movement's support of California Proposition 23, which would suspend AB32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006.[194] The proposition failed to pass, with less than 40% voting in favor.[195]

Many[quantify] of the movement's members also favor stricter measures against illegal immigration.[196]

Polls found that just 7% of Tea Party supporters approve of how Obama is doing his job compared to 50% (as of April 2010) of the general public,[181][needs update] and that roughly 77% of supporters had voted for Obama's Republican opponent, John McCain in 2008.[170][171]

A University of Washington poll of 1,695 registered voters in the state of Washington reported that 73% of Tea Party supporters disapprove of Obama's policy of engaging with Muslim countries, 88% approve of the controversial Arizona immigration law enacted in 2010 that requires police to question people they suspect are illegal immigrants for proof of legal status, 54% feel that immigration is changing the culture in the U.S. for the worse, 82% do not believe that gay and lesbian couples should have the legal right to marry, and that about 52% believe that "[c]ompared to the size of the group, lesbians and gays have too much political power".[197][198][199]

The movement has been supported nationally by prominent individuals and organizations.[200][201]

An October 2010 Washington Post canvass of 647 local Tea Party organizers asked "which national figure best represents your groups?" and got the following responses: no one 34%, Sarah Palin 14%, Glenn Beck 7%, Jim DeMint 6%, Ron Paul 6%, Michele Bachmann 4%.[64]

The success of candidates popular within the Tea Party movement has boosted Palin's visibility.[202] Rasmussen and Schoen (2010) conclude that "She is the symbolic leader of the movement, and more than anyone else has helped to shape it."[203]

In June 2008, Congressman Dr. Ron Paul announced his non profit organization called Campaign for Liberty as a way of continuing the grassroots support involved in Ron Paul's 20072008 presidential run.[citation needed] This announcement corresponded with the suspension of his campaign.[citation needed]

In July 2010, Bachmann formed the House congressional Tea Party Caucus. This congressional caucus, which Bachmann chaired, is devoted to the Tea Party's stated principles of "fiscal responsibility, adherence to the Constitution, and limited government".[204] As of March 31, 2011, the caucus consisted of 62 Republican representatives.[66] Rep. Jason Chaffetz and Melissa Clouthier have accused them of trying to hijack or co-opt the grassroots Tea Party Movement.[205]

Note: the self-reported membership numbers below are several years old.

FreedomWorks, Americans for Prosperity, and DontGo, a free market political activist non-profit group, were guiding the Tea Party movement in April 2009, according to The Atlantic.[174] Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks were "probably the leading partners" in the September 2009 Taxpayer March on Washington, also known as the 9/12 Tea Party, according to The Guardian.[82]

In 2011 the movement launched a monthly magazine, the Tea Party Review.[211]

Other influential organizations include Americans for Limited Government, the training organization American Majority, the Our Country Deserves Better political action committee, and Glenn Beck's 9-12 Project, according to the National Journal in February 2010.[201]

Sarah Palin headlined four "Liberty at the Ballot Box" bus tours, to raise money for candidates and the Tea Party Express. One of the tours visited 30 towns and covered 3,000 miles.[221] Following the formation of the Tea Party Caucus, Michele Bachmann raised $10million for a political action committee, MichelePAC, and sent funds to the campaigns of Sharron Angle, Christine O'Donnell, Rand Paul, and Marco Rubio.[222] In September 2010, the Tea Party Patriots announced it had received a $1,000,000 donation from an anonymous donor.[223]

In an August 30, 2010, article in The New Yorker, Jane Mayer asserted that the brothers David H. Koch and Charles G. Koch and Koch Industries provided financial support to one of the organizations that became part of the Tea Party movement through Americans for Prosperity.[224][225] The AFP's "Hot Air Tour" was organized to fight against taxes on carbon use and the activation of a cap and trade program.[226] A Koch Industries company spokesperson issued a 2010 statement saying "No funding has been provided by Koch companies, the Koch foundation, or Charles Koch or David Koch specifically to support the tea parties".[227]

A USA Today/Gallup poll conducted in March 2010 found that 28% of those surveyed considered themselves supporters of the Tea Party movement, 26% opponents, and 46% neither.[228] These figures remained stable through January 2011, but public opinion changed by August 2011. In a USA Today/Gallup poll conducted in January 2011, approximately 70% of adults, including approximately 9 out of 10 Republicans, felt Republican leaders in Congress should give consideration to Tea Party movement ideas.[229] In August 2011, 42% of registered voters, but only 12% of Republicans, said Tea Party endorsement would be a "negative" and that they would be "less likely" to vote for such a candidate.[230]

A Gallup Poll in April 2010 found 47% of Americans had an unfavorable image of the Tea Party movement, as opposed to 33% who had a favorable opinion.[231] A 2011 opinion survey by political scientists David E. Campbell and Robert D. Putnam found the Tea Party ranked at the bottom of a list of "two dozen" American "religious, political, and racial groups" in terms of favorability "even less liked than Muslims and atheists."[192][232] In November 2011, The New York Times cited opinion polls showing that support for the Tea Party had "fallen sharply even in places considered Tea Party strongholds." It quoted pollster Andrew Kohut speculating that the Tea Party position in Congress was perceived as "too extreme and not willing to compromise".[233]

A CBS News/New York Times poll in September 2010 showed 19% of respondents supported the movement, 63% did not, and 16% said they did not know. In the same poll, 29% had an unfavorable view of the Tea Party, compared to 23% with a favorable view.[234] The same poll retaken in August 2011 found that 20% of respondents had a favorable view of the Tea Party and 40% had an unfavorable view.[235] A CNN/ORC poll taken September 2325, 2011 found that the favorable/unfavorable ratio was 28% versus 53%.[236]

An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll in September 2010 found 27% considered themselves Tea Party supporters. 42% said the Tea Party has been good for the U.S. political system; 18% called it a bad thing. Those with an unfavorable view of the Tea Party outnumbered those with a favorable view 3630%. In comparison, the Democratic Party was viewed unfavorably by a 4237% margin, and the Republican Party by 4331%.[237]

A poll conducted by the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute in March 2010 found that 13% of national adults identified themselves as part of the Tea Party movement but that the Tea Party had a positive opinion by a 2823% margin with 49% who did not know enough about the group to form an opinion.[171] A similar poll conducted by the Winston Group in April 2010 found that 17% of American registered voters considered themselves part of the Tea Party movement.[182]

After the mid-2011 debt ceiling crisis, polls became more unfavorable to the Tea Party.[238][239] According to a Gallup poll, 28% of adults disapproved of the Tea Party compared to 25% approving, and noted that "[t]he national Tea Party movement appears to have lost some ground in popular support after the blistering debate over raising the nation's debt ceiling in which Tea Party Republicans... fought any compromise on taxes and spending".[238] Similarly, a Pew poll found that 29% of respondents thought Congressional Tea Party supporters had a negative effect compared to 22% thinking it was a positive effect. It noted that "[t]he new poll also finds that those who followed the debt ceiling debate very closely have more negative views about the impact of the Tea Party than those who followed the issue less closely."[239] A CNN/ORC poll put disapproval at 51% with a 31% approval.[240]

A Rasmussen Reports poll conducted in April 2012 showed 44% of likely U.S. voters held at least a somewhat favorable view of Tea Party activists, while 49% share an unfavorable opinion of them. When asked if the Tea Party movement would help or hurt Republicans in the 2012 elections, 53% of Republicans said they see the Tea Party as a political plus.[241]

A February 2014 article from Forbes.com reported about the past few years, "Nationally, there is no question that negative views of the Tea Party have risen. But core support seems to be holding steady."[13] In October 2013, Rasmussen Reports research found as many respondents (42%) identify with the Tea Party as with President Obama. However, while 30% of those polled viewed the movement favorably, 50% were unfavorable; in addition, 34% considered the movement a force for good while 43% considered them bad for the nation. On major national issues, 77% of Democrats said their views were closest to Obama's; in contrast, 76% of Republicans and 51% of unaffiliated voters identified closely with the Tea Party.[242]

Other survey data over recent years show that past trends of partisan divides about the Tea Party remain. For example, a Pew Research Center poll from October 2013 reported that 69% of Democrats had an unfavorable view of the movement, in contrast to 49% of independents and 27% of Republicans.[13] A CNN/ORC poll also conducted October 2013 generally showed that 28% of Americans were favorable to the Tea party while 56% were unfavorable.[243] In an AP/GfK survey from January 2014, 27% of respondents stated that they considered themselves a Tea Party supporter in comparison to 67% that said that they did not.[13]

Beginning in 2009, the Gadsden flag became widely used as a protest symbol by Tea Party protesters nationwide.[244][245] It was also displayed by members of Congress at Tea Party rallies.[246] Some lawmakers dubbed it a political symbol due to the Tea Party connection[245] and the political nature of Tea Party supporters.[247]

The Second Revolution flag gained national attention on January 19, 2010.[248] It is a version of the Betsy Ross flag with a Roman numeral "II" in the center of the circle of 13 stars symbolizing a second revolution in America.[249] The Second Revolution flag has been called synonymous with Tea Party causes and events.[250]

Some members of the movement adopted the term as a verb, and a few others referred to themselves as "teabaggers."[251][252] News media and progressive commentators outside the movement began to use the term mockingly and derisively, alluding to the sexual connotation of the term when referring to Tea Party protesters. The first pejorative use of the term was in 2007 by Indiana Democratic Party Communications Director Jennifer Wagner.[253] The use of the double entendre evolved from Tea Party protest sites encouraging readers to "Tea bag the fools in DC" to the political left adopting the term for derogatory jokes.[252][254][255] It has been used by several media outlets to humorously refer to Tea Party-affiliated protestors.[256] Some conservatives have advocated that the non-vulgar meaning of the word be reclaimed.[252] Grant Barrett, co-host of the A Way with Words radio program, has listed teabagger as a 2009 buzzword meaning, "a derogatory name for attendees of Tea Parties, probably coined in allusion to a sexual practice".[257]

On April 29, 2009, Obama commented on the Tea Party protests during a townhall meeting in Arnold, Missouri: "Let me just remind them that I am happy to have a serious conversation about how we are going to cut our health care costs down over the long term, how we're going to stabilize Social Security. Claire McCaskill and I are working diligently to do basically a thorough audit of federal spending. But let's not play games and pretend that the reason is because of the recovery act, because that's just a fraction of the overall problem that we've got. We are going to have to tighten our belts, but we're going to have to do it in an intelligent way. And we've got to make sure that the people who are helped are working American families, and we're not suddenly saying that the way to do this is to eliminate programs that help ordinary people and give more tax cuts to the wealthy. We tried that formula for eight years. It did not work. And I don't intend to go back to it."[258][259]

On April 15, 2010, Obama noted the passage of 25 different tax cuts over the past year, including tax cuts for 95% of working Americans. He then remarked, "So I've been a little amused over the last couple of days where people have been having these rallies about taxes. You would think they would be saying thank you. That's what you'd think."[260][261]

On September 20, 2010, at a townhall discussion sponsored by CNBC, Obama said healthy skepticism about government and spending was good, but it was not enough to just say "Get control of spending", and he challenged the Tea Party movement to get specific about how they would cut government debt and spending: "And so the challenge, I think, for the Tea Party movement is to identify specifically what would you do. It's not enough just to say, get control of spending. I think it's important for you to say, I'm willing to cut veterans' benefits, or I'm willing to cut Medicare or Social Security benefits, or I'm willing to see these taxes go up. What you can't dowhich is what I've been hearing a lot from the other sideis say we're going to control government spending, we're going to propose $4trillion of additional tax cuts, and that magically somehow things are going to work."[262][263]

US News and World Report reported that the nature of the coverage of the protests has become part of the story.[264] On CNN's Situation Room, journalist Howard Kurtz commented that "much of the media seems to have chosen sides". He says that Fox News portrayed the protests "as a big story, CNN as a modest story, and MSNBC as a great story to make fun of. And for most major newspapers, it's a nonstory".[264] There were reports that the movement had been actively promoted by the Fox News Channel.[265][266]

According to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, a progressive media watchdog, there is a disparity between large coverage of the Tea Party movement and minimal coverage of larger movements. In 2009, the major Tea Party protests were quoted twice as often as the National Equality March despite a much lower turnout.[267]In 2010, a Tea Party protest was covered 59 times as much as the US Social Forum (177 Tea Party mentions versus 3 for Social Forum) despite the attendance of the latter being 25 times as much (600 Tea Party attendees versus at least 15,000 for Social Forum).[268]

In April 2010, responding to a question from the media watchdog group Media Matters posed the previous week, Rupert Murdoch, the chief executive of News Corporation, which owns Fox News, said, "I don't think we should be supporting the Tea Party or any other party." That same week, Fox News canceled an appearance by Sean Hannity at a Cincinnati Tea Party rally.[269]

Following the September 12 Taxpayer March on Washington, Fox News said it was the only cable news outlet to cover the emerging protests and took out full-page ads in The Washington Post, the New York Post, and The Wall Street Journal with a prominent headline reading, "How did ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, and CNN miss this story?"[270] CNN news anchor Rick Sanchez disputed Fox's assertion, pointing to various coverage of the event.[271][272][273] CNN, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, and CBS Radio News provided various forms of live coverage of the rally in Washington throughout the day on Saturday, including the lead story on CBS Evening News.[271][273][274][275]

Read the original:

Tea Party movement - Wikipedia

What do Austin, Toronto, and Vienna have in common? According to Greg Clark, global head of Future Cities & New Industries at HSBC Group, each offers clues on how cities can continue to deliver on their promise of economic opportunity. Cities are the original engines of social mobility and have enabled people to escape poverty over the last 400 years, he says.

In Austin, liberal land-use policies have opened the door to more affordable housing in the fast-growing city. Meanwhile, in Vienna, major investments in public transportation have made getting around the city cheap and easy. And in Toronto, thoughtful approaches to public education have helped bring students from immigrant and refugee families from the margins to the center of the educational process.

Still, many cities arent delivering these kinds of inclusive opportunities for their residents. Speculative housing markets in some cities attract more investors than families. And in others, haphazard zoning rules minimize public spaces and deprioritize public transit. The result? The ladder of social and economic mobility is broken, making some cities exclusive rather than inclusive. I think your location matters a lot more than we realize when it comes to inclusion and your socioeconomic status, says Miguel Gamio, head of global cities at Mastercard.

Mastercard created the head of global cities job for Gamio in 2018, tasking him with building partnerships to address important issues facing urban areas and the people who live there. As part of this role, Gamio took the helm of City Possible, a network of urban leaders, academics, and corporate partners working on issues such as sustainable urban development and urban planning to protect cities most vulnerable residents. Individual cities serve as test cases for how best to address these issues, with the hope that successful initiatives can provide the model for these strategies to be scaled more broadly around the world.

One key pillar of City Possible is to deliver alternative financial services to underserved communities. These communities face a range of barriers to financial inclusion, from a lack of access to traditional banking services to an inability to take advantage of an increasingly digitalized financial system. While many cities subsidize such things as housing and food, they often fall short when it comes to addressing issues around financial equity and inclusion. This is a core element of how people can find their way to opportunity and prosperity and to being an active part of society and the economy, Gamio says.

Los Angeles recently took a creative approach to financial inclusion with its Angeleno Connect program. Developed with Mastercard and MoCaFi, a financial technology firm focused on closing the racial wealth gap, Angeleno Connect provides a no-fee debit card and mobile app to residents without bank accounts. The card has given the local government a streamlined way during the pandemic to disburse financial support and also gives users access to scores of city services such as making park reservations or applying for a business license.

Perhaps most importantly, Angeleno Connect gives users immediate access to no-fee banking. For unbanked populations, the simple task of cashing a check can mean giving up a portion of that money to a check-cashing service. With their Angeleno Connect card, users can deposit checks directly to their account using the programs digital app and even make in-person, no-fee deposits at places like 7-Eleven and CVS. The Angeleno Connect card is a really good prototype, and there will be many more like it, Clark says.

Its not enough to simply give people easy access to deposits. More steps are necessary on the march toward financial inclusion, including education around making smart money decisions and how building credit can open doors to other financial opportunities. For instance, climbing the ladder of social and economic mobility gets easier when a bank will lend capital to launch a business or when an individuals financial literacy helps them consistently make smart saving and spending decisions.

Thats a journey that is best taken with strong partners. Gamio notes that the Angeleno Connect program wouldnt have been possible without the public-private partnership behind the initiative. We each have different strengths and weaknesses and different roles in society, he says. I believe 100% that collaboration is a superpower.

Consider the recent partnership between Mastercard and city leaders in San Jose: The citys Cash for Trash programpart of its BeautifySJ initiativeincentivized unhoused individuals to clean up trash around encampments as part of a larger effort to combat blight. In exchange for their cleanup efforts, they were given reloadable cards from Mastercard. In this case, both Mastercard and city leaders had a crucial role to play. Gamio says city workers simply couldnt carry around cash to give to individuals; and Mastercard relied on the credibility and expertise of the city to oversee the program.

This kind of collaborative partnership plays a central role in scaling these innovative programs around the world. For instance, the model that gave rise to the Angeleno Connect project is being considered in dozens of other cities in the U.S. and beyond. Thats the power of this common framework weve created, Gamio says. Its not only about inclusion within the context of one city, but its about impacting progress across many cities at scale.

Read more from the original source:

How innovative partnerships are helping cities deliver economic opportunities to all - Fast Company

The worlds attention may be fixed on Russias challenge to Ukraine, but the Biden administration faces something much larger: an intensifying challenge by China, Russia and opportunists such as Iran and North Korea to the global order that the U.S. inherited from a faltering British Empire in the 1940s. While Vladimir Putintightened his grip on Belarus and stepped up his war of nerves against Ukraine, China signaled its support for Russias Ukraine policy, sent record numbers of fighter jets through Taiwans defense zone, conducted joint naval drills with Russia near Japan, and beefed up its naval presence between Japan and Taiwan. While Chinas ambassador to the U.S. warned of a growing danger of war over the island, Jin Canrong, a leading Chinese academic with extensive contacts in the Chinese Communist Party, predicted that China would carry out an armed unification with Taiwan by 2027.

For some, this crescendo of global crises illustrated the overextension of American power. Why, they ask, does every problem in the world end up in Americas inbox? Why not give the world a rest and turn our attention to urgent problems at home?

See the original post:

America Is Stronger Than It Looks - The Wall Street Journal

news, national,

Meet the 24 castaways competing in Australian Survivor: Blood v Water. Filmed in Charters Towers, Queensland, this season close friends and family members will go head-to-head in the Aussie outback. There are newcomers, returning players, familiar faces and two-time US Survivor winner Sandra Diaz-Twine. Jonathan LaPaglia returns as host of the show which kicks of on January 31 at 7:30pm on 10 and 10 play. Alex, 26, warehouse operator, Victoria, & Jay, 34, drummer, Victoria Alex and Jay met after Jay started dating Alex's sister. Now the pair will put their own relationship through a very unique test. A superfan of the game, Alex wants to fly under the radar secretly making moves, while Jay is relaxed but also determined and competitive. Amy, 24, beautician, Victoria & Khanh, 30, restaurateur, Victoria Amy and Khanh are set to put their relationship under a microscope. Charming and disarming, Amy is ready to make a name for herself after living in her older brother's shadow, while Khanh has a burning desire to win the title of Sole Survivor. And don't be fooled, he's willing to do whatever it takes, even if it means he has to lie, cheat and steal to get there. Andy, 49, advertising consultant & Kate, 46, mum, Queensland After Kate pushed Andy to apply for Australian Survivor: Champions V Contenders, not only is it Andy's shot at redemption, but Kate hopes to make her own mark on the game. Planning to use his skills as a professional poker player to read people, Andy's also ready to try and play a more honest, fun, and good-natured game this time around. Caring and selfless, Kate is used to doing everything for her family but is now taking a chance on herself, determined to make her first time playing the game count. Ben, 33, tradie, Queensland & Shayelle, 31, bio medical student, Queensland Partners Ben and Shayelle realise the value of having each other on their Survivor journeys, especially when the going gets tough. Shay says: "Having him there will be priceless in terms of support. I struggle to not get caught up in my emotions sometimes, so I have to force myself to think my way out it." Standing at 6'4", Ben is a standout in the crowd kind of guy and has a drive to win. He hopes to be a player who is a beast at challenges but also someone the tribe trusts. Chrissy, 42, teacher & Croc, 41, Ex-NRL player, Queensland While Chrissy may not have a lot of Survivor knowledge, she is playing with Croc to keep his dream of being part of the game alive. Croc's strengths in the game will be his observation skills, as well as his brute physical strength. He will build genuine relationships and ascertain what makes people tick, how they behave and then make big moves when the time is right to eliminate his biggest threats. Although she may not be a superfan, Chrissy is confident and competitive and wants to prove to her kids that she can do anything and to inspire them to do the same in their lives. David, 51, project manager, Queensland & Briana, 26, digital producer, Queensland Briana is competing for the title of Sole Survivor alongside her father, David. Briana says her dad is the skull crusher - the guy who is going to lay down the law while she is the entertainer and social butterfly. As a Project Manager at a construction firm, David knows himself to be very strategic. He believes in getting the lay of the land, being flexible and making tough ruthless calls when need be. Survivor is Briana's dream, but one David is more than happy to follow saying: "I've been vortexed into this dream and I'm pumped. We're gonna smash it because our relationship together is strong. We're both ambitious, both fierce." Jesse, 22, triathlete, ACT & Jordie, 25, landscaper, Victoria Jesse has a tight bond with his older brother, Jordie who is playing alongside him and although the two claim to be polar opposites of each other, they are dedicated to becoming the perfect team. As a landscaper by trade, Jordie is used to digging holes and getting himself out of them. And despite the ease of which he makes friends, Jordie knows Survivor is about more than just being mates and is about understanding people on a deeper level. Jesse enjoys anything that will challenge him and he will push through any physical or mental boundaries to get there. As a professional triathlete in training, Jesse is used to intense endurance and he even finds comfort in pain. Although he has a cheeky disposition, he does not take failure lightly. Jordan, 29, personal trainer & Josh, 31, pilot, Victoria Jordan is playing with his cousin Josh and between the two, Jordan is the one who will be diving in headfirst. Although they are cousins, Jordan and Josh say their relationship is closer than most brothers. Jordan's ready to push himself both physically and mentally as far as he can when he hits the mat, to see what he is truly made of. Josh on the other hand, considers himself a Survivor armchair expert and is excited to see if he can execute the physical, social, and strategic gameplay in real life. KJ, 37, former flight attendant & Sophie, 31, company director, Victoria As a Survivor superfan, Kate (KJ) comes armed with the knowledge she has taken on after meticulously watching past seasons, and is excited to play with her younger sister, Sophie. Two very different people, KJ is hoping to use some of Sophie's traits to help her in the game as Sophie is a driven businesswoman who doesn't take no for an answer. Sophie's also hoping to use some of KJ's Survivor super knowledge to help her gain her footing. "I know how well-prepared KJ is so I'll be going to her for advice, strategy, gameplay, what I would do in a certain situation." Mark, 42, former SAS commander & Sam, 37, endurance athlete, Victoria Mark was last seen on Australian Survivor Season 2, where he formed a power couple with fellow castaway Sam. The two fell in love, were married in 2019 and have a son together. Last time Mark played Survivor, he thought being fit and strong would be enough to go far in the game, but he quickly realised this was not the case and that his social game would need to improve. He won't be making the same mistake twice. Sam's mantra is "composure and calm, this is a marathon not a sprint", and says she doesn't have a game play as she wants to adapt to the people she is playing with. Mel, 33, chiropractor, Victoria & Michelle, 33, speech pathologist, NSW Mel is playing with identical twin sister Michelle, who she shares a "twin connection" with. They're able to know what each other are thinking and can even feel each other's pain. Melissa is a Survivor superfan, who wears her heart on her sleeve but is a keen strategist and loves the psychology behind the game. As a social butterfly, Mel makes friends easily and is planning to make alliance a key part of her game plan. Michelle has built a career on communication and prides herself on catching people out in their lies. As a speech pathologist, she is confident her innate understanding of human behaviour will push her to find out what is driving her fellow tribe mates. Sandra, 47, queen of Survivor & Nina, 24, accounts clerk, USA Sandra is a two-time Survivor US winner and now she is ready to take on Australian Survivor and defend her international Survivor throne. Sassy and outspoken and having been a part of Survivor US five times, she is excited to be playing with a family member for the very first time. While she might be the Queen, Sandra has never played Survivor: Blood V Water and is hoping not to impact Nina's game. Sandra says: "I'm set in my ways but having Nina out there will remind me, 'Sandra, tone it down.' It's a whole different game, it's a whole different place, it's a whole different theme so I can't be the same Sandra as before." Playing in the shadow of her mother's Survivor legacy doesn't intimidate Nina, who is ready for the challenge. Nina says: "The best advice my mum has given me is to keep your head down but your ears open. You don't want the target to be on you, you want it to be on somebody else, so that has been really helpful."

/images/transform/v1/crop/frm/GJZ5TVpAk84wrTzsQfLQRB/8fb77f6a-195c-4800-b19e-c3970b55a32e.png/r5_0_1915_1079_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg

WATCH

January 31 2022 - 6:00PM

Meet the 24 castaways competing in Australian Survivor: Blood v Water.

Jonathan LaPaglia returns as host of the show which kicks of on January 31 at 7:30pm on 10 and 10 play.

The 2022 Australian Survivor cast.

Alex, 26, warehouse operator, Victoria, & Jay, 34, drummer, Victoria

Alex and Jay met after Jay started dating Alex's sister. Now the pair will put their own relationship through a very unique test. A superfan of the game, Alex wants to fly under the radar secretly making moves, while Jay is relaxed but also determined and competitive.

Amy, 24, beautician, Victoria & Khanh, 30, restaurateur, Victoria

Amy and Khanh are set to put their relationship under a microscope. Charming and disarming, Amy is ready to make a name for herself after living in her older brother's shadow, while Khanh has a burning desire to win the title of Sole Survivor. And don't be fooled, he's willing to do whatever it takes, even if it means he has to lie, cheat and steal to get there.

Andy, 49, advertising consultant & Kate, 46, mum, Queensland

After Kate pushed Andy to apply for Australian Survivor: Champions V Contenders, not only is it Andy's shot at redemption, but Kate hopes to make her own mark on the game. Planning to use his skills as a professional poker player to read people, Andy's also ready to try and play a more honest, fun, and good-natured game this time around. Caring and selfless, Kate is used to doing everything for her family but is now taking a chance on herself, determined to make her first time playing the game count.

Ben, 33, tradie, Queensland & Shayelle, 31, bio medical student, Queensland

Partners Ben and Shayelle realise the value of having each other on their Survivor journeys, especially when the going gets tough. Shay says: "Having him there will be priceless in terms of support. I struggle to not get caught up in my emotions sometimes, so I have to force myself to think my way out it." Standing at 6'4", Ben is a standout in the crowd kind of guy and has a drive to win. He hopes to be a player who is a beast at challenges but also someone the tribe trusts.

Chrissy, 42, teacher & Croc, 41, Ex-NRL player, Queensland

While Chrissy may not have a lot of Survivor knowledge, she is playing with Croc to keep his dream of being part of the game alive. Croc's strengths in the game will be his observation skills, as well as his brute physical strength. He will build genuine relationships and ascertain what makes people tick, how they behave and then make big moves when the time is right to eliminate his biggest threats. Although she may not be a superfan, Chrissy is confident and competitive and wants to prove to her kids that she can do anything and to inspire them to do the same in their lives.

David, 51, project manager, Queensland & Briana, 26, digital producer, Queensland

Briana is competing for the title of Sole Survivor alongside her father, David. Briana says her dad is the skull crusher - the guy who is going to lay down the law while she is the entertainer and social butterfly. As a Project Manager at a construction firm, David knows himself to be very strategic. He believes in getting the lay of the land, being flexible and making tough ruthless calls when need be. Survivor is Briana's dream, but one David is more than happy to follow saying: "I've been vortexed into this dream and I'm pumped. We're gonna smash it because our relationship together is strong. We're both ambitious, both fierce."

Jesse, 22, triathlete, ACT & Jordie, 25, landscaper, Victoria

Jesse has a tight bond with his older brother, Jordie who is playing alongside him and although the two claim to be polar opposites of each other, they are dedicated to becoming the perfect team. As a landscaper by trade, Jordie is used to digging holes and getting himself out of them. And despite the ease of which he makes friends, Jordie knows Survivor is about more than just being mates and is about understanding people on a deeper level. Jesse enjoys anything that will challenge him and he will push through any physical or mental boundaries to get there. As a professional triathlete in training, Jesse is used to intense endurance and he even finds comfort in pain. Although he has a cheeky disposition, he does not take failure lightly.

Jordan, 29, personal trainer & Josh, 31, pilot, Victoria

Jordan is playing with his cousin Josh and between the two, Jordan is the one who will be diving in headfirst. Although they are cousins, Jordan and Josh say their relationship is closer than most brothers. Jordan's ready to push himself both physically and mentally as far as he can when he hits the mat, to see what he is truly made of. Josh on the other hand, considers himself a Survivor armchair expert and is excited to see if he can execute the physical, social, and strategic gameplay in real life.

KJ, 37, former flight attendant & Sophie, 31, company director, Victoria

As a Survivor superfan, Kate (KJ) comes armed with the knowledge she has taken on after meticulously watching past seasons, and is excited to play with her younger sister, Sophie. Two very different people, KJ is hoping to use some of Sophie's traits to help her in the game as Sophie is a driven businesswoman who doesn't take no for an answer. Sophie's also hoping to use some of KJ's Survivor super knowledge to help her gain her footing. "I know how well-prepared KJ is so I'll be going to her for advice, strategy, gameplay, what I would do in a certain situation."

Mark, 42, former SAS commander & Sam, 37, endurance athlete, Victoria

Mark was last seen on Australian Survivor Season 2, where he formed a power couple with fellow castaway Sam. The two fell in love, were married in 2019 and have a son together. Last time Mark played Survivor, he thought being fit and strong would be enough to go far in the game, but he quickly realised this was not the case and that his social game would need to improve. He won't be making the same mistake twice. Sam's mantra is "composure and calm, this is a marathon not a sprint", and says she doesn't have a game play as she wants to adapt to the people she is playing with.

Mel, 33, chiropractor, Victoria & Michelle, 33, speech pathologist, NSW

Mel is playing with identical twin sister Michelle, who she shares a "twin connection" with. They're able to know what each other are thinking and can even feel each other's pain. Melissa is a Survivor superfan, who wears her heart on her sleeve but is a keen strategist and loves the psychology behind the game. As a social butterfly, Mel makes friends easily and is planning to make alliance a key part of her game plan. Michelle has built a career on communication and prides herself on catching people out in their lies. As a speech pathologist, she is confident her innate understanding of human behaviour will push her to find out what is driving her fellow tribe mates.

Sandra, 47, queen of Survivor & Nina, 24, accounts clerk, USA

Sandra is a two-time Survivor US winner and now she is ready to take on Australian Survivor and defend her international Survivor throne. Sassy and outspoken and having been a part of Survivor US five times, she is excited to be playing with a family member for the very first time. While she might be the Queen, Sandra has never played Survivor: Blood V Water and is hoping not to impact Nina's game. Sandra says: "I'm set in my ways but having Nina out there will remind me, 'Sandra, tone it down.' It's a whole different game, it's a whole different place, it's a whole different theme so I can't be the same Sandra as before." Playing in the shadow of her mother's Survivor legacy doesn't intimidate Nina, who is ready for the challenge. Nina says: "The best advice my mum has given me is to keep your head down but your ears open. You don't want the target to be on you, you want it to be on somebody else, so that has been really helpful."

Read the original post:

Meet the cast of Australian Survivor: Blood v Water - Daily Liberal

Residents in parts of Berkhamsted and Boxmoor will go to the polls this week to elect two new district councillors.

The tightly-contested wards of Berkhamsted West and Boxmoor will choose a new representative on Thursday, February 3.

The Conservatives previously held all available seats in the two wards since 2003, but Liberal Democrat councillors completed a sweep during the 2019 local elections.

One seat in either ward will be up for election after Nicky Woolner (Berkhamsted West) and Liz Uttley (Boxmoor) both left their roles at the start of November.

Dacorum Borough Council usually elect all district councillors at the same time, with the next elections due in 2023 so the new members will serve a year-long term.

The by-elections wont have a significant say on the ultimate make-up of the council, with the Conservative group currently holding 31 of the councils 51 seats, with 19 Liberal Democrat councillors and one independent.

The Local Democracy Reporter has contacted all eight candidates to outline their priorities for the ward and explain they should get your vote on Thursday.

In addition to a district council seat, Berkhamsted West will also elect a new town councillor for the ward.

Anne Foster (Liberal Democrat)

The Liberal Democrats said: Anne has lived in the ward since 1976 and has been speaking up against inappropriate development in the town for many years. Last winter she joined forces with local residents groups and Lib Dem councillors to raise awareness of the threat to the green belt around Berkhamsted from Dacorum Borough Councils local plan.

Annes hard work contributed to the councils decision to re-write the proposals. She is determined that any re-write of the plan should come back to the public for full consultation.

Anne has also been outspoken against sewage being released into the River Bulbourne and is an advocate for protecting and improving green space within the town and for more electric vehicle charging points.

She has also been speaking up to prioritise local school places for Berkhamsted children for a number of years, having sent her children to schools in the town.

Anne is already putting her back into improving Berkhamsted. As part of Berkhamsted Town Councils re-wilding project to attract pollinators into the centre of town, she can often be found digging in the flower beds on Lower Kings Road.

The by-election has been called because Councillor Nicky Woolner has moved to the south coast to be near her elderly mother, leaving vacancies at town and borough. Nicky Woolner says I was humbled that you chose me to be your representative. I know that Anne Foster will be a dedicated councillor, who will continue to fight for our town.

If elected Anne will be the Dacorum Borough Council ward mate of Councillor Sally Symington who says Anne has an unrivalled local knowledge and excellent understanding of the many issues facing Berkhamsted.

"Annes understanding of planning issues is second-to-none. Anne will be an outstanding advocate for local residents ensuring their voice is heard and the councils decisions scrutinised.

Kevin Fielding (Green Party)

Kevin Fielding said: I first moved to Berkhamsted in 1999, have raised my family here, and care deeply about this community and its surrounding environment.

"I have also worked locally as a Science Teacher and Laboratory Technician at Ashlyns School and been involved in many social and sporting activities, such as regular attendance with my son at the Sunnyside Rural Trust, and being an active member of the local golf, orienteering and running clubs.

I care passionately that residents views are heard, respected and acted upon by local decision makers. I promise to bring new energy, and an independent voice to council meetings.

"Decisions made by councillors affect our local environment and community. However, the wishes and interests of the town and its residents were ignored in some past decisions.

"I will fight against any further attempts to damage our town and its surroundings and actively support any scheme that promotes a cleaner, happier, and more prosperous future for us.

"I promise to listen to your views, and I will bring them to bear at council meetings.

With your vote, I can win here, and enhance your voice in the decisions that will affect how Berkhamsted will develop in the coming years. Residents in Berkhamsted have already recently voted in two Green town councillors, so lets get your voice heard at Dacorum Borough Council too.

Gary Moore (Conservative)

Gary Moore: Im passionate about Berkhamsted. After many years of saving, I bought my first home here with my fiance, Georgina. We are so lucky to live in this wonderful town with beautiful countryside on our doorstep.

"Im campaigning to represent you at Dacorum Borough Council and Berkhamsted Town Council because I want to make Berkhamsted even better.

"I promise to fight for Berkhamsteds interests. I have three priorities: 1) a better Local Plan, 2) better access to hospital services and 3) a greener town.

"Ill be hardworking, responsible and accessible. You will see me around town: on the high street and in local shops and restaurants. Please contact me if you have comments or questions I will listen to you. I hope you will see the results of my actions in real improvements to the town.

"Berkhamsted needs strong representatives who are passionate about making it the best possible place to live. Ill make sure Berkhamsteds voice is heard; whether thats about the effects of population growth on congestion and pollution, access to healthcare or protecting our local environment and biodiversity.

"If you also love our town and agree we can make it even better please vote for me on the 3rd of February.

Peter Scott (Labour Party)

The Labour Party said: Your local Labour Party candidate Peter Scott has lived in Berkhamsted since 2011. Peter is a retired Chartered Electrical Engineer, who specialised in domestic appliances.

Prior to moving to Berkhamsted to be closer to his family, Peter served as a Labour County Councillor in Greater Manchester for 2 periods, 1974 and 1986, during which time Peter was the Chairperson of Planning, with responsibility for the local Green Belt.

Following the abolition of the GMC in 1986, Peter served as a councillor for Stockport Metropolitan Council from 1987 to 2011. At Stockport Metropolitan Council, Peter was the leader of the opposition from 2005 to 2010, after which he stepped down, having decided to move to Berkhamsted, to be closer to his family.

Peter is standing as your local Labour candidate in both the Berkhamsted West Dacorum Borough Council by-election, on Thursday 3rd February 2022, as well as in the Berkhamsted West Town Council by-election on the same date.

If elected, Peter Scott will campaign on the following issues:

> The installation of Green heating systems and insulation in new and renovated social housing

> The provision of 35 per cent of new housing permissions being socially affordable rented properties

> Re-wilding farm land and waterways wherever possible.

Cameron Brady-Turner (Labour Party)

The Labour Party did not respond to a request for a statement, but Cameron Brady-Turner has previously stood as a candidate in the 2019 General Election and 2021 County Council elections. He works as a caseworker in Parliament.

Simy Dhyani (Liberal Democrats)

Simy Dhyani said: For me being a councillor is all about the community and standing up for the community. I am a hands on person who will do my best to represent Boxmoor and represent the residents on the Council.

It is important that the next councillor knows Boxmoor. I own and run the Boxmoor Steakhouse and lived in Boxmoor for almost 10 years.

"My children went to South Hill Primary and I have lived in Beechfield Road, St Johns Road and the Cotterells.

"Over that time I have made many friends in the area, built up a record of community engagement, as well as being a friend of Boxmoor Foodies.

For a few years now, time permitting, I have helped as one of the several community volunteers with litter picking and traffic surveys. Through my business I was able to help Boxmoor Primary with their raffle.

"When Marcus Rashford ran a campaign to get the Government to provide free school meals during half term October 2020 my business did what the Government didnt do and provided lunches for low income families. Which I paid for out of my own pocket.

Brandon Geary (Conservative Party)

On the Hemel Hempstead Conservative Association website, Brandon Geary said: Brandon says: I have a huge passion for politics, and it is my life when I am not working. I have dreamt about becoming an MP and making a real change, and I realise I can also serve local people by becoming the Conservative Councillor for Boxmoor.

"Boxmoor is a commuter area and I know just how important investment in transport infrastructure is.

To reduce car numbers, we need more accessible transport and increased frequency serving the area. I also believe we need to work to reduce problem parking in Boxmoor and keep the open spaces of Boxmoor open to all, whilst keeping an eye on planning and encroachment.

MP for Hemel Hempstead, Sir Mike Penning added: Its good to see a young enthusiastic conservative candidate standing for Boxmoor.

"Brandon is a very personable young man and will serve the residents of Boxmoor well. I wish him the very best for the election on the 3rd February.

Sherief Hassan (Green Party)

Sherief Hassan said: I have lived and worked in Hemel Hempstead for about 25 years and have raised both of my children here. I have been actively involved in Boxmoor through Boxmoor Theatre, where I am the Child Protection Officer, and have campaigned for the environmental welfare of the area for more years than I can remember.

"I was recently co-opted as a committee member of the Boxmoor Trust, which has been a great honour and responsibility.

"We have recently been able to improve our signage to fight against the terrible dog mess problem that plagues the Trust land which is enjoyed by many residents in Boxmoor.

Im a trustee of the Halsey Field Nature site which was recently recognised by the CPRE as a valuable site worthy of protection. After involvement with the Woodlands for All group led by Hemel Hempstead Quakers, I jointly founded Woodland Towns woodlandtowns.org.uk to record our vital green spaces and monitor/map all planning applications and consultations to allow residents to understand the impact and threats of mass housebuilding.

"I have always believed that there should be a balance with our elected representatives. The views and needs of residents have to be paramount, and that must include their future welfare and security.

"This needs independence and a willingness to work with different partys to achieve the best results. Boxmoor and the rest of Hemel Hempstead needs someone who will know when to fight and to compromise in order to respect the wishes and needs of the town and its surroundings.

My colleagues, Councillor Paul de Hoest and Mary Jane Hardinge have worked with the Lib Dem Town councillors in Berkhamsted to bring active change. Simon Grover in St Albans who has a 60 per cent vote share is proving his worth in all aspects of Council activity, and Herts Councillor Ben Crystall is on the planning and licensing committees in Herts County Council. Hemel Hempstead needs its first Green Councillor.

With your vote, I can win and be the Green who will enhance your voice in the decisions that will affect how Boxmoor will develop in the coming years.

Polling stations are open between 7am and 10pm on February 3.

Dacorum Borough Council has also confirmed the count will be held at The Forum, Hemel Hempstead on Thursday night.

Last year most councils in Hertfordshire quarantined ballot papers for 24 hours, but this will not be required this year with the result announced on the same day as the vote.

> Brandon Geary and Cameron Brady-Turner did not respond to a number of requests from the Local Democracy Reporter, which is why we havent been able to include an image

Read more:

Here are the candidates standing in Dacorum by-elections for Berkhamsted West and Boxmoor - Hemel Today

comment,

It is said that we live in a post-truth world and the question is how is our Federal Governments faring in that new world and in serving the needs of the people? Are our Federal Ministers, in delivering on their oath to serve the people? Our Energy Minister tells us that we need more fossil fuels rather than less if we are going to avoid the price of electricity rising. Some might say that energy policy has been to create uncertainty rather than certainty in renewable energy investment market. With the price of fossil fuel, especially thermal coal rising as the world emerges from COVID, the wholesale price of electricity has risen, in those states most reliant on coal, NSW and Queensland and least in those that have more renewable energy, in particular South Australia, which is close to achieving their target of 100 per cent renewable energy. The organisation responsible for running our electricity grid, the AEMO, tells us that we need more renewable energy and less coal and gas as they are more expensive than renewable energy, the price of which continues to fall. Many of our local corporates such as Coles are committed to using only renewable energy. READ ALSO: Goulburn house prices rise as city prepares to swell So who do we believe? Is our Federal Government preferencing fossil fuel companies ahead of the needs of the Australian people, both in respect of their health and their economic well being? Does the Federal National Party support those companies over the needs of farmers and the protection of farming land? Interesting that this new council is putting out feelers for rezoning the southern end of Auburn Street. The properties have had no maintenance for years so if they can be knocked down and redeveloped in the name of "progress" it will be a huge money making scheme for the present owners. McKell Place is now a speed-plus zone and a very big danger to many, such as children (day care), the medically impaired, movie-goers and club patrons. Does anyone agree that a general manager of a LGA jumping and posing in front of a camera with a local Liberal is unsuitable and inappropriate? I find Warwick Bennet's 'playful' photo shoot at the netball courts with the local Liberal MP to be both unseemly and questionable. If you want to be a politician you should stand for election, otherwise fade into the background like a good public servant. I am writing to you today in the hope that you can join the Tarago Community, Goulburn Mulwaree Council and the No toTarago Incinerator and Southern Highlands area in the fight to oppose the Veolia Woodlawn Mine Waste to Energy Infrastructure. In other words an incinerator. READ ALSO: School scores welcome crossing as police urge slow-down If these plants are so safe you have to ask why are they wanting to build them in rural areas. There is a list of proposed location. This is not our rubbish it belongs to Sydney and that's where it should stay. The Government stand on these facilities seems to be of sight out of mind. Why build these plants in the first place? Veolia wants to spend $600 million building an incinerator at Tarago. Why not use that money developing new ways to break down the non-recyclable material and produce new articles. This can be done, already there is a microbe organism that does just that. With the fallout from this incinerator our primary producers in this region will be affected, the water catchment, our dams, the environment, the air that we breath our health and the future of the next generation. This plant won't be fixing climate change, it will be harming it. All this advertising regarding cleaner air and environment, someone has got it wrong. The toxic fumes, dioxine, furins and other substances omitted from this plant isn't safe. The toxic plume will be carried through the air to so many towns and regions. The so-called scientific support and the EPA can not give a definite answer to the question? READ ALSO: Hospitals under 'enormous pressure' but support is at hand, says Health How safe are these incinerators? If an incident occurs it will take six to eight hours to shut the plant down. That's not good enough. There's so many things that is not right with this situation. So much to be said. You can be reading for hours regarding all the negatives of this proposal. Read for yourself, like myself and all the others who are concerned for the future of our environment and our existence. For Veolia it's all about the dollar and who can benefit. Veolia. Take a moment out of your busy schedule. Think about it, sit in an open pasture and watch the animals, breath the air, look at the environment our lives and then make a decision. Hopefully it will be to help us oppose this Waste to Energy Infrastructure. An INCINERATOR

/images/transform/v1/crop/frm/hFr6g9patBg6iG57tGHW5M/35c66443-4e05-4a8d-8a16-8915b495158f.jpg/r3_1_1198_676_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg

Fossil fuel pushing up electricity prices

It is said that we live in a post-truth world and the question is how is our Federal Governments faring in that new world and in serving the needs of the people? Are our Federal Ministers, in delivering on their oath to serve the people?

Our Energy Minister tells us that we need more fossil fuels rather than less if we are going to avoid the price of electricity rising. Some might say that energy policy has been to create uncertainty rather than certainty in renewable energy investment market.

With the price of fossil fuel, especially thermal coal rising as the world emerges from COVID, the wholesale price of electricity has risen, in those states most reliant on coal, NSW and Queensland and least in those that have more renewable energy, in particular South Australia, which is close to achieving their target of 100 per cent renewable energy.

The organisation responsible for running our electricity grid, the AEMO, tells us that we need more renewable energy and less coal and gas as they are more expensive than renewable energy, the price of which continues to fall.

Many of our local corporates such as Coles are committed to using only renewable energy.

So who do we believe? Is our Federal Government preferencing fossil fuel companies ahead of the needs of the Australian people, both in respect of their health and their economic well being? Does the Federal National Party support those companies over the needs of farmers and the protection of farming land?

Interesting that this new council is putting out feelers for rezoning the southern end of Auburn Street.

The properties have had no maintenance for years so if they can be knocked down and redeveloped in the name of "progress" it will be a huge money making scheme for the present owners.

Slow down cars in McKell Place

McKell Place is now a speed-plus zone and a very big danger to many, such as children (day care), the medically impaired, movie-goers and club patrons.

Public servants should stay in the background

I find Warwick Bennet's 'playful' photo shoot at the netball courts with the local Liberal MP to be both unseemly and questionable.

If you want to be a politician you should stand for election, otherwise fade into the background like a good public servant.

Join fight against Veolia incinerator

I am writing to you today in the hope that you can join the Tarago Community, Goulburn Mulwaree Council and the No toTarago Incinerator and Southern Highlands area in the fight to oppose the Veolia Woodlawn Mine Waste to Energy Infrastructure. In other words an incinerator.

If these plants are so safe you have to ask why are they wanting to build them in rural areas. There is a list of proposed location. This is not our rubbish it belongs to Sydney and that's where it should stay. The Government stand on these facilities seems to be of sight out of mind. Why build these plants in the first place?

Veolia wants to spend $600 million building an incinerator at Tarago. Why not use that money developing new ways to break down the non-recyclable material and produce new articles.

This can be done, already there is a microbe organism that does just that.

With the fallout from this incinerator our primary producers in this region will be affected, the water catchment, our dams, the environment, the air that we breath our health and the future of the next generation.

This plant won't be fixing climate change, it will be harming it. All this advertising regarding cleaner air and environment, someone has got it wrong.

The toxic fumes, dioxine, furins and other substances omitted from this plant isn't safe. The toxic plume will be carried through the air to so many towns and regions. The so-called scientific support and the EPA can not give a definite answer to the question?

How safe are these incinerators? If an incident occurs it will take six to eight hours to shut the plant down. That's not good enough.

There's so many things that is not right with this situation. So much to be said. You can be reading for hours regarding all the negatives of this proposal. Read for yourself, like myself and all the others who are concerned for the future of our environment and our existence.

For Veolia it's all about the dollar and who can benefit. Veolia. Take a moment out of your busy schedule. Think about it, sit in an open pasture and watch the animals, breath the air, look at the environment our lives and then make a decision. Hopefully it will be to help us oppose this Waste to Energy Infrastructure. An INCINERATOR

Do you have something to say? Send a letter to the editor:

See the original post:

Energy contradiction, Veolia incinerator and more | Letters to the editor - Goulburn Post