Category Archives: Fiscal Freedom

ANCA launches anca.org/april action platform encouraging U.S. Representatives to co-sign the FY23 Armenian Caucus Foreign Aid Letter; Support full range of April pro-Armenian priorities

WASHINGTON, DC The Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) is rallying community and coalition support for a Congressional Armenian Caucus request for at least $150 million in US aid to Artsakh and Armenia, as Appropriations Subcommittee on State-Foreign Operations chairwoman Barbara Lee (D-CA) and Ranking Member Hal Rogers (R-KY) begin crafting the US House version of the Fiscal Year 2023 foreign aid bill.

We thank the Armenian Caucus for its leadership in seeking to end the US aid blockade of Artsakh and stop US military assistance to Azerbaijan, said ANCA executive director Aram Hamparian. ANCA activists and allies can take action at anca.org/april speaking out on these two issues and our other policy priorities.

A Dear Colleague letter sent to members of Congress encourages support for funding to strengthen the U.S.-Armenia strategic partnership, bolster democratic gains in Armenia, and hold Azerbaijan accountable for their destabilizing behavior in the region. The letter includes the following budgetary requests:

$50 million in humanitarian and development aid to Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh)

The suspension of all US military assistance to Azerbaijan

$100 million in security and economic assistance to Armenia.

The ANCA has launched an action platform through which pro-Armenian advocates can encourage members of Congress to cosign the Congressional letter as well as cosponsor the Armenian Genocide Education Act, and attend the Capitol Hill Armenian Genocide Observance, scheduled to take place on April 27th.

The full text of the Congressional Armenian Caucus letter is provided below.

#####

Dear Chairwoman Lee and Ranking Member Rogers:

We write to thank the Appropriations Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs for your longstanding support of the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh). This includes the important language you incorporated into the Fiscal Year 2022 bill providing $45 million in funding for Armenia and $2 million in demining assistance for Artsakh. We ask that you build on these historic investments by considering the inclusion of the below provisions that will help strengthen Americas standing with partner countries in the region and hold Azerbaijan accountable for its ongoing hostilities in Artsakh and Armenia.

Robust U.S. Assistance in Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh)

The people of Artsakh continue to face severe hardships caused both by the deadly 44-day war Azerbaijani forces provoked in 2020 and their ongoing provocations against innocent civilians to this day. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), 88 percent of the approximately 90,000 refugees displaced to Armenia were women, children, and the elderly. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) also acknowledges that an acute humanitarian crisis continues for many of these families, including those who have been able to return to Artsakh. Unfortunately, the $5,000,000 in Fiscal Year 2021 funding USAID has committed to date is insufficient to address the overwhelming needs of these people.

The U.S. has historically promoted peace in Artsakh through U.S. government-funded landmine and unexploded ordnance clearance efforts and enabling rebuilding by investing in similar humanitarian assistance initiatives. We are requesting a robust humanitarian assistance package for Artsakh that lives up to American humanitarian commitments. The package would help provide Armenian refugees with the aid, housing, food security, water and sanitation, health care, rehabilitation, and demining/UXO clearance they need to reconstruct their communities, rebuild their lives, and resettle their homes.

We urge you to include the following provision in the body of the foreign aid bill:

Of the funds appropriated under this heading, not less than $50,000,000 shall be made available for assistance in Nagorno-Karabakh, used to provide humanitarian assistance and rebuilding and resettlement support to the Armenian victims of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, both those residing in and those displaced from Nagorno-Karabakh. Such assistance will help to meet basic human needs, including maternity healthcare and drinking water programs.

Security, Economic, and Governance Assistance for Armenia

The United States remains uniquely positioned to make important diplomatic advances in the South Caucasus. This is especially true in Armenia, an ancient nation with a modern democracy that continues to make democratic reforms in a region dominated by autocratic leaders. Providing significant assistance to Armenia will help make its people more secure, bolster its democracy, sustain economic development, stabilize its civil society, and aid its ongoing response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

This critical investment will build on past support for Armenia and Artsakh by the Subcommittee and will help strengthen the U.S.-Armenia strategic partnership, solidify our presence, and grow our influence in the region. We request the following language be included in this legislation:

Of the funds appropriated by this Act, not less than $100 million shall be made available for security, economic, governance, and rule of law assistance to Armenia. An increase in funding to accounts such as the Department of States Office of the Coordinator of U.S. Assistance to Europe, Eurasia, and Central Asia and the U.S. Agency for International Developments Bureau for Europe and Eurasia should be made available for these purposes.

Prohibition on U.S. Military Aid to Azerbaijan

President Ilham Aliyev began his brutal 2020 assault on Artsakh not long after receiving over $100 million in security assistance through the Section 333 Building Partner Capacity Program in Fiscal Years 2018 and 2019. Azerbaijani forces used advanced Turkish drones, cluster munitions, and white phosphorus to indiscriminately attack homes, churches, and hospitals killing thousands in the 44-day war. While an agreement halting the war was signed in November 2020, Azerbaijan continues its aggressive behavior in the region with troop movements and other escalatory measures into Armenian and Artsakh territories. On March 25, 2022, State Department Principal Deputy Spokesperson Jalina Porter State stated the U.S. was deeply concerned about these actions and called them irresponsible and unnecessarily provocative. It is equally concerning that Azerbaijani troops continue to carry out the desecration of Armenian Christian holy sites, weaponize major sources of natural gas for civilians, and illegally detain and abuse Armenian prisoners of war.

The Section 333 funding, paired with other U.S. funding to Azerbaijan through the IMET and FMF programs, clearly defies almost two decades of a policy of parity in security assistance to Armenia and Azerbaijan. In fact, according to a January 31, 2022, report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the State Department likely violated Section 907 of the FREEDOM Support Act in sending this and other assistance to Azerbaijan from 2014 to 2021. They did so by not properly consulting and communicating with Congress on what processes they used to determine whether U.S. aid to Azerbaijan could be used for offensive purposes against Armenia.

The overdue process of holding Azerbaijan accountable must begin with Congress encouraging the Administration to fully enforce Section 907, restricting the State Departments authority to waive this law, and enacting statutory prohibitions on any new U.S. military or security aid to Azerbaijan. We request that the following language be included in the final SFOPs bill:

None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available under this Act may be provided to the Government of Azerbaijan through U.S. security assistance programs.

Armenian Prisoners of War and Captured Civilians

On November 9, 2020, Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Russia signed a tripartite statement to end the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, also known as Artsakh, where all parties agreed that the exchange of prisoners of war, hostages and other detainees as well as the remains of the fatalities shall be carried out. However, the Government of Azerbaijan continues to detain an estimated 200 Armenian prisoners of war, hostages, and detained persons, misrepresenting their status in an attempt to justify their continued captivity. We request that the following language be included in the final SFOPs bill:

The Committee is concerned by Azerbaijans failure to immediately return all Armenian prisoners of war and captured civilians and, thus, (2) urges the Secretary of State to engage at all levels with Azerbaijani authorities, including through the OSCE Minsk Group process, to make clear the importance of adhering to their obligations, under the November 9 statement and international law, to immediately release all prisoners of war and captured civilians.

Again, thank you for your leadership on the Subcommittee. We appreciate your consideration of these requests.

The Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) is the largest and most influential Armenian-American grassroots organization. Working in coordination with a network of offices, chapters and supporters throughout the United States and affiliated organizations around the world, the ANCA actively advances the concerns of the Armenian American community on a broad range of issues.

Visit link:

Armenian Caucus seeks over $150 million in US aid for Artsakh and Armenia - Armenian Weekly

When Rafael Correa was elected president of Ecuador in 2006, it seemed the Left had finally found a born political leader and orator. Correa began well, promoting Latin American unity, vowing to clean up the justice system, supporting workers rights, and closing a U.S. military base on the Ecuadorian Coast. This was the real thing, a left-wing president who was not for turning, a man to drag the country into the modern age.

But cracks began to appear. The president of the Constitutional Assembly, Alberto Acosta, was ousted for going too slowly and because his popularity rivaled that of Correa. Problems also began to mount with the Indigenous movement over mining and water, and more generally over its ability to mobilize large numbers of people in opposition to government policy. But as the oil money rolled in after the crash of 2008/2009, the regimes infrastructure planshospitals, schools, universities, and roadsbegan to take shape, and the problems appeared minor.

These plans included the countrys Amazon region, often portrayed as backward and a place where dreams of a new development might be realized. And the Correa team included many dreamers. But here, as others before him, Correas ship of dreams foundered on the reality of the Amazons shifting sands, on his inability to bend heaven and earth to his will, and on the impossibility of changing the world in 10 years. In his book Reality of Dreams: Post-Neoliberal Utopias in the Ecuadorian Amazon, Japhy Wilson analyzes what went wrong for Correa and Ecuadors Amazon region. This discussion took place over email and has been edited for clarity and length.

Gerard Coffrey: Your book is about the failures of some of the grand plans Rafael Correa had for the Amazon. But this is not a straightforward critique; it seems youre trying to get to some deeper truth about the nature of dreams and how they are perverted by power and local/global realities.

Japhy Wilson: Yes, thats absolutely right. Im using the case of the Citizens Revolution to explore these broader and more fundamental questions. The book is about the reality of dreams in two senses of the term: the constitutive role of utopian fantasies in the production of social reality, and the distortion and inversion of these dreams in the process of their realization. The multiple modernizing megaprojects that were launched by the Correa administration in the Ecuadorian Amazonhighways, ports, airports, cities, universities and the post-neoliberal ideologies that they embodied all functioned as utopian fantasies that promised an escape from extractive capitalism. But they did so by concealing rather than addressing the material reality of the regimes continuing complicity with this form of capital accumulation. This material reality ended up distorting and inverting these utopias, both ensuring their failure and repurposing them as elements of the extractivist system they were supposedly intended to overthrow.

GC: Correa clearly did have plansfor example constructing roads and building hospitals and hydroelectric plantsbut you say that in the case of the Amazon, the plans for transformation were not plans at all, simply a desire for change that lead to an ad hockery and confusion, of which Correa may not even have been aware.

JW: I dont want to be dismissive of Correa or to deny the many real achievements of his administration. There is no question that Correa is a brilliant politician. He seized the unique historical opportunity opened by the confluence of an oil boom and the legitimacy crisis of neoliberalism in the country, launching himself into power, transforming the constitution, renegotiating oil contracts, and implementing a remarkably extensive series of policies and projects financed by oil wealth, many of which undoubtedly improved the lives of millions of Ecuadorians. But in the case of the iconic megaprojects that I researched in Ecuador together with my friend and colleague Manuel Bayn, I was repeatedly confronted with a barrage of apparently nonsensical scenarios and a seemingly endless litany of state dysfunction. This was primarily due, I think, to the subordinate position of Ecuador within the dynamics of global capitalism, essentially as a reserve of natural resources for the accumulation of capital in other parts of the world. The sudden influx of petrodollars during the oil boom allowed for the staging of spectacular infrastructural megaprojects, which are relatively easy to orchestrate if you happen to have the cash. But like most extractivist states, the Ecuadorian state had always been weak in institutional terms and had been systematically gutted by decades of neoliberal reforms prior to the arrival of the Citizens Revolution. It therefore lacked the capacity to integrate these material symbols of modernity into a deeper process of structural transformation.

When the boom came to an end in 2014, the illusion collapsed. But even prior to the oil crash, the distance between the celebratory discourses of the government and the realities on the ground was surreal in its immensity. And as you say, Correa and his accomplices at the heights of the state frequently appear to have had very little knowledge of these realities. The book documents several cases in which Correa was seemingly misled into believing in the success of his projects by those engaged in their failed implementation.

GC: In his first term, it became clear that Correa was trying to change the 200-year-old trajectory of the country in a few short years. He was supported by many people who seriously believed in a most beautiful utopia, while others warned that he was taking on too much. It appears the latter were right. Was this the reason any of these projects failed: trying to do too much too quickly, with the result that many spiraled out of control? Or was it Correas ego and sense of his own power that spiraled out of control?

JW: I think the two are very closely connected. When I spoke to people tasked by Correa with implementing his visions on the ground, they repeatedly commented on his unrealistic expectations for their rapid realization. Take for example the case of Ikiam, a biotechnology university constructed in the jungle. Correa had visited a so-called Knowledge City in South Korea, returning to Ecuador convinced that the country should immediately follow this recipe for the transformation of its economy from natural resource dependency to a knowledge economy. A specialist who Correa invited to participate in the project pointed out that South Koreas success in this regard was the fruit of decades of industrial development, which could not simply be leapt over in the space of a couple of years. But Correa dismissed his advice and blacklisted him.

The planning for the university began in 2012, with its inauguration scheduled for 2014. A team of international scientists was assembled for the planning phase and insisted that the timeframe was completely unrealistic. But in the words of one of the architects, the response from Correas team was There is no time! Build the fucking thing now! This was not just an expression of Correas ego; many others around him were similarly hubristic. At a deeper level I would say that it was symptomatic of the delusions of omnipotence that can grip anyone in charge of a state suddenly awash with petrodollars. The demand for rapid action is also a consequence, perhaps, of the awareness underlying such delusions that the boom could end at any moment and ruin everything. This is precisely what happened in the case of Ikiam: by the time of the hasty inauguration of the main campus in October 2014, the oil price had already begun its precipitous descent. The budget was repeatedly slashed as a result. Laboratories and entire campuses remained unbuilt, and scientists began appropriating Indigenous knowledge in the absence of facilities for conducting their own research. Meanwhile, budgetary shortfalls were being desperately compensated by an aggressive and increasingly privatized expansion of the primary commodity frontier. Needless to say, Correas dream of a knowledge economy did not come to fruition. This is only one of several such examples discussed in the book.

GC: You talk about the fragility of the state, no matter the government, and the inevitable desire to project stability onto policies that can only be partly influenced by those who are supposedly in control.

JW: This is a crucial point to emphasize. I am aware that my critique of the Citizens Revolution could be misinterpreted as a neoliberal dismissal of all state-led attempts to improve the human condition, in favor of the supposedly superior operations of the market. This is absolutely not my point. Capital is a wild beast, which must constantly expand to survive, and which blindly cannibalizes itself in an interminable series of self-engendered crises. It is the fate of the statebe it in neoliberal or post-neoliberal guiseto attempt to harness this beast, while simultaneously projecting a reassuring illusion of coherence and stability. This illusion is bound to break down at certain moments, which are of great danger for state and capital alike. The book addresses such moments, in the form of explosive uprisings launched in the Ecuadorian Amazon against transnational oil companies and their militarized state protection. In contrast to the utopian fantasies of the Citizens Revolution, I argue that these moments offer glimpses of an insurgent utopia, grounded in direct confrontation with the forces of capital that such state fantasies attempt to conceal, and directly staging the utopian ideal of egalitarian freedom. In such moments the fragility of the state, and the dependence of capital on state power, are powerfully revealed. This helps to explain the violence with which the state invariably responds to such events.

GC: In the context of the neoliberal governments of Moreno, and now Lasso, how do you see those early Correa years with their optimism and spectacular modernizing dreams?

JW: Despite the dramatic failure of the projects that I describe, it is difficult not to look back with nostalgia at this time, given the subsequent return to neoliberalism red in tooth and claw. But we should not forget the brutality with which Correa cracked down on dissent. This of course pales in comparison to Morenos repression of the October 2019 uprising. But unlike Moreno, Correa was leading a supposedly revolutionary project that claimed to be defending the poorest and most marginalized sectors of the Ecuadorian population against the power of capital. This adds a layer of profound hypocrisy to his violent repression of uprisings and resistances in places like El Pindo, Dayuma, and Playas de Cuyabeno, all of which were related to the depredations of extractive capitalism.

It is also important to emphasize that the Citizens Revolution was already shifting rapidly back towards neoliberalism before Moreno took over from Correa. This disavowed policy shift was arguably necessitated by the fiscal crisis resulting from the oil crash. But there is a sense in which it was inscribed into the project from the start. A careful reading of Correas first election manifesto, and many subsequent speeches and policy statements, reveals a consistent commitment to systemic competitiveness, a policy of adaptation to the logic of capital rather than a strategy for its subversion, which was more concerned with providing the infrastructures required by global capital accumulation than with breaking with its power. Such a break is of course no easy task. But despite Correas revolutionary rhetoric, this task was never attempted. The Citizens Revolution had an unprecedented historical opportunity to enact genuinely radical change. And it did not take it. This was its true failure, and the main reason why it should not be looked back on with nostalgia.

Gerard Coffey is the founder and director of the on-line political journal Lalineadefuego.info (Quito 2010). Born in Wallasey, UK, he has lived in Ecuador for more than 25 years; he has published in numerous journals in both English and Spanish.

Japhy Wilson is an Honorary Research Fellow in Politics at Manchester University. Between 2014 and 2016, he worked in Ecuador with CENEDET, a David Harvey led team sponsored by the Correa government. He was also a member of the National Centre of Strategies for the Right to Territory (CENEDET) in Ecuador, a research institute financed by the Correa government and directed by the British Marxist geographer David Harvey.

Read the original:

Reality of Dreams: Post-Neoliberal Utopias in the Ecuadorian Amazon - NACLA

The next leader needs to have it all: red meat for the party base, suburban-friendly ideas and charisma to match Prime Minister Trudeau or whoever follows in his footsteps.

A growing movement of grassroots Conservatives are convinced theyve found their guy in Pierre Poilievre.

He may be young, at just 42, but hes no rookie. The seven-term MP and former Cabinet minister launched his campaign shortly after the party caucus dumped Erin OToole on Groundhog Day, as truckers settled in for the long haul all over downtown Ottawa.

Hes now drawing larger crowds than even Stephen Harper, the partys founding father, managed when he was elected the revamped partys first leader in 2004.

Poilievre is part happy warrior and part angsty firebrand. He preaches freedom to crowds of hundreds, an impressive feat for the early days of a Canadian party leadership campaign, from pulpits in suburban convention centers and rural fairgrounds across Canada.

Hes all about finding and eliminating gatekeepers a swamp of government bureaucrats, politicians and special interests who get in the way of people who want to build things, live the lives they want to live and make something of themselves.

His stump speech isnt subtle. He rails against government overreach, bloated bureaucracies and corrupt politicians. He promises to make Canada the freest country on Earth. He implores everyone within earshot to buy a Conservative membership.

That final appeal is arguably the most important part of any speech he delivers, because members elect leaders and he needs all the support he can get.

Garry Keller, a vice president at StrategyCorp and longtime chief of staff to Poilievre ally and former Cabinet minister John Baird, said the first principle of any leadership campaign is to sell memberships to supporters who will come out to vote both lapsed members and those who are politically homeless but like what they hear.

Poilievre kicks up controversy wherever he goes with blunt rhetoric and policy proposals that would dismantle government bureaucracy. But thats the point. Its not rocket science, but that first principle seems to be lost on a lot of the chattering classes and political commentariat, said Keller.

Winning the leadership on Sept. 10 is only half the battle, of course. Next up is winning the country with the same ideas, or some version of them that wont let down his growing fan base but still win all the swing ridings that can turn an election.

POLITICO recorded a recent Poilievre rally in suburban Ottawa and took it to party strategists and policy wonks to decode.

What he said: There was a lady in New Brunswick who got a phone call that her mother was suddenly on her deathbed in Ontario, but she couldnt get on a plane to fly and see her. And so she had to drive through the freezing rain because of a personal medical decision required because of her own medical history, and risked her life to make it just in time to say goodbye. Ladies and gentlemen, this is no longer about medical science. Justin Trudeaus actions on this have been nothing but political science.

What they heard: This government doesnt want to end Covid, because they want to control you and everyone you love.

Keller remembers it wasnt so long ago that Trudeau openly opposed vaccine mandates.

Early last summer, the prime minister acknowledged that people with allergies, immunocompromised conditions or religious convictions shouldnt be forced to get the shot. More recently, Trudeaus rhetoric lost much of that nuance especially when the trucker convoy trundled toward Ottawa and the prime minister dismissed them as a small fringe minority.

Enter Poilievre, whose crowd in Ottawa ate up his advocacy for truckers who felt attacked by their government. Hes saying he understands the frustration of those Canadians who didnt get vaccinated for whatever reason, said Keller. And he doesnt disrespect them for the choices that they made.

Expert analysis: Poilievre only occasionally distinguishes between vaccine mandates imposed by the federal government and those enforced at the provincial level. When patrons were forced to show proof of vaccination before entering a variety of public places in their day-to-day lives, those were mostly in place thanks to provinces.

The federal government still enforces certain proof of vaccination rules. Anyone who boards an airplane or train in Canada must show a certificate. Anyone entering Canada must also present proof. But the feds are starting to relax rules: fully vaccinated travelers are no longer required to show a negative Covid test at the border.

Poilievre has embraced protesters opposed to a rule imposed at both American and Canadian border crossings that forces non-essential workers, including truckers, to be fully vaccinated. As truckers settled into an occupation of downtown Ottawa streets, Canadas largest trucking company said the border mandates were not an issue at all because most of their drivers were vaccinated.

What he said: In New Brunswick, they are bringing in about 130,000 barrels of overseas oil. Every day in Canada. Thats almost a million barrels a week. Newfoundland, right nearby, is proposing to expand its production by 400,000 barrels a day. In other words, if we can get the regulatory gatekeepers out of the way, the Newfoundlanders could produce enough oil to supply the New Brunswick refineries and then have 200,000 extra barrels leftover to ship off overseas to break the foreign dependence on dictators, to replace dollars for dictators with paychecks for our people.

What they heard: Down with the Liberal regulatory state. Down with Russian oil and gas. Drill, baby, drill.

Whats really going on: Poilievres argument is fodder for supporters of the oil and gas sector, but mismatched timelines and refining processes complicate his proposal.

Atlantic Canada imports overseas oil partly because there are no crude oil pipelines built through Quebec and Ontario to connect the east coast with Alberta, which has more oil than it knows what to do with. Transport by rail is limited which is why the region imports products from overseas.

The Rock wants to double oil output, and high prices are certainly an incentive to do so, but with production forecast to peak in 2032 in Canada, tapering demand doesnt strengthen the long-term business case for more drilling.

When Poilievre proposed 200,000 hypothetical extra barrels to ship overseas to break the foreign dependence on dictators thats more or less the actual plan Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson announced last month.

Both Canada and the United States are upping production to increase the availability of oil to go to international markets to alleviate energy security concerns in European countries keen to wean off Russian oil and gas.

Canadas industry is expected to increase oil and gas production by up to 300,000 barrels per day by the end of the year in response to the global energy crunch provoked by Russias war in Ukraine.

Because Canada doesnt have an export facility, Canadian products need to go through the states to the U.S. Gulf to get to Europe. Any pitches to ship oil from the Rock to Europe also runs against another challenge: Not all refineries on the continent are equipped to process heavy crude, which constitutes half of what Newfoundland and Labrador produces.

What he said: For Justin Trudeau everythings about timing. He picks exactly this moment, when we have 30-year highs for inflation and record-smashing gas prices, to hit Canadians another time with another tax increase. Now lets be clear. Higher gas prices are not a byproduct or an indirect consequence of the carbon tax. They are the purpose the stated purpose of the carbon tax.

What they heard: Those high gas prices youre paying arent a coincidence, or due to global events beyond our control its been Trudeaus plan all along.

Former Conservative leadership candidate Rudy Husny tells POLITICO that Poilievres focus on the carbon tax hits a couple of important notes as he tries to connect with party members.

In one way, Husny said Poilievres vow to scrap the carbon tax demonstrates hes a principled Conservative to members who may have felt betrayed by former leader OTooles climate policy flip-flop. OToole surprised many Conservatives by releasing a carbon-pricing plan after winning a leadership race during which he pledged to kill Trudeaus program.

But Poilievre isnt interested at least for right now in centrist voters who hate the pain at the pump but also worry about climate change. Husny said Poilievres stance draws a clear red line between himself and some of his main rivals who support carbon pricing, like Jean Charest and Patrick Brown.

Poilievre has also been leaning into the tax as a cost of living issue at a time of white-hot inflation.

His goal is really to relate to Canadians, said Husny, who was a senior official in the Harper government. He needs to show that he understands them, he understands their issues and their concerns, and that hes on their side and he has their backs.

Expert analysis: The federal carbon tax has helped lift energy prices in provinces without their own pricing program. But the federal government, which imposes carbon pricing in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario, has moved to offset the costs by distributing a quarterly benefit to households.

Inflation and pump prices are soaring for a number of reasons. The factors include global supply chain bottlenecks and, more recently, the economic fallout from Russias war on Ukraine.

The carbon tax, which is meant to deter consumption, has also played a role.

Bank of Canada Governor Tiff Macklem gave MPs a sense last month of just how much the federal carbon pricing regime has fed into Canadas price growth.

Macklem told members of the finance committee in a letter, which was obtained by Global News, that Januarys inflation reading of 5.1 percent would have been 4.7 percent if the pollution charge had been removed from the prices for gasoline, natural gas and fuel oil.

What he said: Think of this: We have 5.7 percent inflation. If that were to repeat itself for just five years, you would lose almost a third of your paychecks purchasing power. If your boss were to walk up to you and say he was cutting your paycheck by a third, youd say take this job and shove it. But when Justin Trudeau does it to you, he expects you to just shut up and pay out. And thats exactly what they have done.

My government is going to take exactly the opposite direction. We are going to reassert the Bank of Canadas traditional mandate which is to keep inflation low and protect the purchasing power of our money.

What they heard: Ottawa bureaucrats and paper-pushers are stealing your paycheck.

Poilievre is trying to show party members, and Canadians more broadly, that hes fighting for them, Husny said. The goal of any leadership contestants message is to attract new members to the party who will vote for them and to win the support of existing card carriers.

In the process, politicians often face the challenge of taking a complex issue, like inflation or macroeconomics, and presenting it in a way so that everyone understands it, Husny said.

If he speaks like an economist or [at a] really high level by saying, The fiscal policy of this government is not good nobody is going to understand it, as you can imagine, he said. Some people and some economists will maybe say that, obviously, hes taking some shortcuts, and especially in terms of [quantitative easing] and printing money. But its also a very powerful image that people can understand.

Even if some economists accuse Poilievre of oversimplifying the issue, Husny argued it still goes in his favor because he can counter by saying his critics dont understand that most voters paychecks are not worth as much as before.

He can then stress to them that he gets it.

But Husny also cautioned that Poilievre might be better off reserving his critiques for Trudeau, rather than the unelected Bank of Canada governor.

Expert analysis: Poilievres criticisms over the Bank of Canadas policy fixes and Macklem himself have been his go-to lines of attack since 2020.

Hes zeroed in on the central banks large-scale bond purchasing program, which was deployed to protect Canada from Covid-19s economic crisis. Poilievre has tried to label the banks quantitative easing program as a money printing scheme that helped feed Trudeaus record-breaking deficits and price growth.

While government deficits have been known to boost inflation, experts like McGill Universitys Christopher Ragan have argued that the Covid pandemic has been nothing close to normal times.

But Ragan, founding director of the Max Bell School of Public Policy, has warned that the government needs to scale back its spending to avoid stoking any significant price pressures.

What he said: Were going to go with technology instead of taxes. Instead of forcing our provinces to impose a tax on their citizens, were going to incentivize them to enable more environmentally friendly technology, like carbon capture and storage. Were going to export our clean, green energy to the world.

What they heard: Were going to smash the governments heavy-handed restrictions on oil and gas but you can still feel good about green tech, somehow.

A carbon tax burn, a candidates support for Canadas oil and gas sector and a promise to leverage Canadas natural resources to power the world.

Expert analysis: The federal government and Conservatives are mostly on the same page on carbon capture, utilization and storage CCUS deeming the technology necessary to decarbonize the oil and gas sector. The Bloc Qubcois and NDP are on the other side of the argument, viewing the technology as equivalent to a fossil fuel subsidy.

Oil and gas is a significant contributor to Canadas economy, accounting for roughly six percent of gross domestic product. And its a major source of greenhouse gas emissions, too. The sector is responsible for more than a quarter of the countrys total emissions.

Calling CCUS environmentally friendly greenwashes a process used to justify the continued production of oil and gas in a climate emergency and transition era. It gives producers license to produce more when the cost of oil floats around $100 barrels, which is math that bodes well for investors and fossil fuel executives.

Canada, keen to position itself as a climate leader, cant cut off fossil fuels overnight without massive economic disruption. Provinces and territories have jurisdiction over the production and development of natural resources and therein lies the tension with evolving and expanded federal climate policies which some politicians have used to their advantage.

Energy isnt exclusive to oil and gas. Quebec, for example, already exports its clean, green energy to the world. New York City is poised to pay billions for renewable electricity generated by Quebec hydropower via the Champlain Hudson Power Express over the next 25 years.

What he said: The governments now got this new Bill C-11, which will allow the CRTC to regulate what you see, and say, online. They have another bill. They want to ban you from saying anything that the government deems to be harmful. They now want to extend it so that there will be a group of bureaucrats who can cull through all the posts that go online and determine which ones could eventually lead people to think things that they shouldnt think and therefore should be censored for.

What they heard: F-r-e-e-d-o-m.

Shakir Chambers, a principal with Earnscliffe who worked on Doug Fords provincial campaign in 2018, said railing against a perceived government clampdown on free speech is catnip to the crowd. It appeals to the people who want that freedom, who feel that libertarian streak, he said. Less is more, and let me just make my own decisions.

It fits a broader strategy. Poilievre spins every government policy as anti-freedom. Vaccine mandates that fold in truckers? Overreach. The Bank of Canadas pandemic monetary policy? Overreach. Tough rules for pipeline construction and oil exports? Overreach.

The message, said Keller: You dont have a lot of faith in government. I too dont have a lot of faith in government to get things done and build this country.

Expert analysis: The basic goal of Bill C-11 is to update Canadas ancient broadcasting laws for the digital era, and force platforms to incorporate Canadian culture into their offerings.

When he introduced the bill, Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez said it updates the rules so that all broadcasting platforms contribute to our culture. That is all. That is what the bill is all about. But critics say its not that simple.

Michael Geist, the Canada Research Chair in internet and e-commerce law at the University of Ottawa, has raised alarm bells.

Geist has written that the government comms approach seems based primarily on presuming that Canadians wont bother to read the legislation and will therefore take misleading assurances at face value.

Rodriguez insists that digital producers say, YouTubers wont have their content regulated by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission. But Geist says the bill, which is not the Liberals first attempt to update broadcasting rules, does open the door to CRTC regulation of user-generated content.

Poilievres stump speech also references a forthcoming Liberal bill that will attempt to combat online hate. Rodriguez hasnt yet tabled the legislation, which is also a redo after the governments last attempt spawned serious concerns about unintended consequences for freedom of speech in Canada.

An inescapable tension animates every Conservative leadership race. Each candidates popularity with the party base is measured against their future palatability with the rest of the country.

Its not clear Poilievre has the secret sauce to win over Canada. But also, thats not his goal just yet. He needs to win over the Conservatives first.

Some of his promises microtarget subsets of voters. He promises to unleash the power of cryptocurrency in Canada the blockchain capital of the world in his wildest dreams. Crypto bros eat it up, but stumping for alternatives to the loonie might be a tougher sell on the typical Canadian suburbanite.

This race might be Poilievres to lose. His freedom rallies could put him over the top. But the substance behind the rhetoric cant scare off the masses. Otherwise hell just be another loser who cant beat a Liberal.

More:

Decoding the freedom-loving firebrand who wants to be Canada's next PM - POLITICO

SHEBOYGAN - Voters on Tuesdaychose fiveincumbents and fivenew representatives on theSheboygan County board out of 10 contested races.

Members of the 25-person county boardserve a two-year term.

Incumbent election winnersinclude Robert Ziegelbauer in District 12, Christian Ellis in District 18, Jackie Veldman in District 23, William Goehring in District 24 and Roger TeStroete in District 25.

New board members will include Kathleen Donovanin District 3, Suzanne Speltz in District 12, James Coulson in District 13, John Nelson in District 16, former District 18representativeJacob Immel in District 19 and Carl Nonhof in District 20.

This year, 33% of registered voters in the county, about 18,900people, voted in spring elections, a turnout slightly above that of last year (when 27% of registered votersvoted) but well below 2020 (when50% of registered votersvoted).

The Republican Party of Sheboygan County helped several conservative "freedom fighter"candidates campaignfor the county board. Three of the seven candidates Speltz, Coulson and Immelwere elected.

Four candidates, including Speltz, Coulson, Nonhof and Veldman, won by a margin of fewer than 50 votes.

District 3:Incumbent Kathleen Donovan secured 65% of the vote, with 420 votes to Lisa Salgado's 227.

Donovan, 54, moved to Sheboygan in 2014 and was appointed to the county board in December. Donovan'spriorities on the board will include overseeing the implementation of theHealth and Human Services Strategic Plan and retaining county employees, she says.

District 12:Suzanne Speltz narrowly defeated incumbent Robert Ziegelbauer. Speltz secured52.5% of the vote, with 441 votes to Ziegelbauer's 399.

Speltz, 60, is a retired social worker who ran for county board after she saw the negative effects public health emergency orders and mandates had on people's lives, she says. Speltz campaigned on protecting constitutional rights, transparent government and financial independence from grant money with burdensome requirements.

District 13: James Coulson narrowly defeated incumbent Charlette Nennig. Coulson secured 51% of the vote, with 428 votes to Nennig's 411 (a margin of 17 votes).

Coulson, a 45-year-old business owner,campaigned on smaller government, fewer regulations, medical freedom, fiscal responsibility of government and supporting the police.

District 16:John Nelson defeated Kevin Sande, after incumbent Fran Damp did not seek reelection.

Nelson secured 59% of the vote, with 376 votes to Sande's 260.

Nelson, 67, has served on the Plymouth city council since 2013 and has served on several boards including United Way (Plymouth) and Maywood Environmental Park. Nelson campaigned on fiscal responsibility.

District 18:Incumbent Christian Ellis secured 57% of the vote, with 413votes to James Evraets'313.

Christian Ellis, 40, was appointed to the county board in January. He is a lifelong resident of Sheboygan County, a father of four children and works as a corporate recruiter.

District 19:Jacob Immel secured 57% of the vote, with 397votes to Roberta Vollbrecht-Lentz's 295.

Immel, 27, has served on the Sheboygan Falls city council since 2018 and previously served on the county board representing District 18. Important issues Immel will seek to address while on the board include workforce development, economic development, public safety and transparency in government.

District 20:Carl Nonhof narrowly defeated incumbent Brian Hoffmann. Nonhof secured 50.7% of the vote, with 505 votes to Hoffmann's 490.

Nonhof, 70, recently served a term on the Kohler School Board and has a 40-year history of involvement with local groups, he told the Sheboygan Press. Investigatingways to reduce costs for Sheboygan County government and citizens will be a priority for him in office, he says.

District 23: Incumbent Jackie Veldman narrowly defeated Dan Jones.

Veldman secured 50.7% of the vote, with 409 votes to 398 for Jones (a margin of 11 votes).

Veldman, 50, has served on the county board since 2019 and has served six terms on the Town of Mitchell board, including three terms as the town board chairwoman. On the county board, keeping taxes low and expanding access to dependable internet are priority issues for Veldman.

District 24: Incumbent William Goehring secured 76% of the vote, with 559votes to Arush Chahal's 176.

Goehring, 74, has served several years on the county board, including five years as board chairman, has been Town of Sherman board chairman for 35 years andserves on several statewide committees. On the county board, maintaining low taxes will continue to be a priority for Goehring, he says.

District 25: Incumbent Roger TeStroete secured 60% of the vote, with 626votes to David Reichle's 417.

TeStroete, 72, has served several years on the county board, including two terms as board chairman, and has served 12 years on the Town of Holland board. On the county board, maintaining roads will continue to be a priority for TeStroete, he says.

Reach Maya Hilty at 920-400-7485 or MHilty@sheboygan.gannett.com. Follow her on Twitter at @maya_hilty.

See more here:

Voters elect five new faces and five familiar ones to the Sheboygan County Board in the spring general election - Sheboygan Press

The dust has barely settled on the row over halal and jhatka meat in Karnataka that Delhi has jumped in the fray. No, not over the manner of slaughtering, but over the selling of meat itself. The South Delhi Municipal Corporation Mayor sought "closure of meat shops during the nine-days of Navratri festival from April 2 to April 11".

In a letter to the South Delhi Municipal Corporation commissioner dated April 4, Mayor Mukesh Suryan wrote that since devotees of Goddess Durga fast observe fast for nine days during the Navaratri festival with a strict vegetarian diet and abstaining from the use of non-vegetarian food items, the sight of meat being sold in open or near temples makes them uncomfortable. Therefore, meat shops should be closed during the period of Navratri, says Suryan. The period is from April 5 (Tuesday) till April 11.

Suryan has asked the SDMC commissioner to ensure strict adherence to his directives. With nearly 1,500 registered meat shops in SDMCs jurisdiction, this is the first time that the civic body has asked for the closure of meat shops during Navratri.

And with this begins a fresh saga in policing what one eats, how one eats and when one eats. One would have thought that policing the sale and consumption of meat and the kind of meat would be pointless in a country where 80 per cent of people are meat-eaters. A paper published in March 2018 in the Economic and Political Weekly titled 'Provincialising' Vegetarianism, cites data from the National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) that puts a figure on the number of Indian meat consumers. The data even offers demographics nearly 59 per cent of Hindus eat meat, besides over 93 per cent of Christians and Muslims, around 21 per cent of Sikhs and over 78 per cent of Buddhists were meat-eaters. Among the Hindus, nearly 35 per cent of Brahmins were meat-eaters as per India Human Development Survey (IHDS).

In fact, India exported processed meat worth over USD 1.7 million in the fiscal year 2021, making it among the largest exporters of meat. Biryani is the most-searched dish on Google and chicken biryani has been consistently topping the charts over the years for being the most ordered dish on online food apps.

Yet, hypocritical moral policing comes as a societal force when it comes to meat-eater shaming. Especially around festivals or religiously significant days. This takes me back to a childhood memory when as a lone South Indian student in a second-grade classroom in Delhi, I would dread opening my lunch box on Tuesdays. Heavens forbid if my mother had packed the (very yummy) kal-dosais for lunch. You see, the dish resembled an omelette to my North Indian classmates (and even some teachers), who would shame me for eating eggs on Tuesday.

It was not the eggs that were a problem, you see. My classmates used to bring boiled eggs on every other day of the week. Except for Tuesdays. On Tuesdays, they were taught, that eating eggs (or any non-vegetarian food) was a sin, and no amount of convincing and pleading that what I was eating was actually fried rice-and-lentil pancakes would make them change their militant stance.

The irony is that I had never tasted an egg until that point, hailing from a staunchly vegetarian family. Nor (at that point, as a seven-year-old) did I know what an omelette looked like. Funnily enough, a Muslim classmate who was a staunch non-vegetarian used to defend me, having tasted my mothers kal-dosais at my home and knowing what they actually were.

Decades thence we dont seem to have progressed an inch from the ignorant bunch of seven-year-olds who found a reason to moral police and shame a vegetarian for eating (what they assumed was) eggs on a religiously significant day. We still find reasons to moral police eating (and selling) meat during Navaratri.

The upholders of gastronomic policing need to be retold what the Lucknow bench of Allahabad High Court told the Yogi Adityanath government during its crackdown on illegitimate slaughterhouses. Justices Amreshwar Pratap Sahi and Sanjay Harkauli said: To provide an immediate check on the unlawful activity should be simultaneous with facilitating the carrying of lawful activity, particularly that relating to food, food habits and vending thereof that is undisputedly connected with the right to life and livelihood. Food that is conducive to health cannot be treated as a wrong choice.

When he was asked about those who dont observe the festival or the fast, Mayor Suryan said they should respect the sentiments of others. Interestingly, the self-anointed guardians of religious sentiments barely raise a question on whether pork should be banned during Ramzan. Perhaps because of the high(er) incidence of meat-eating among Muslims as compared to the Hindus. Or perhaps because the sensibilities of one religion matter more than that of the other. But then, lets save that absurd debate for another day.

See the article here:

The right to food and the freedom of choice: Should meat be banned during religious festivals? - Times Now

With federal cannabis reform on the table, here's how local sates are spending marijuana taxes

PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) As Washington weighs the risks and rewards of cannabis reform following the House vote to federally legalize marijuana Friday, many lawmakers are looking to states like Oregon and Washington to see how they are already cashing in on cannabis tax revenue.

Last week, the House of Representatives voted to approve the Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement Act, also known as the MORE Act, for the second time in the last two years.

If signed into law, the legislation would expunge former marijuana convictions, reduce current marijuana sentences and remove the drug from the list of scheduled substances under the Controlled Substances Act making the substance legal to consume for adults 21 and over across the U.S.

Although the bill faces an uphill battle in the Senate, it is not the only piece of cannabis reform legislation on the table this month. In February of 2022, the House passed the SAFE Banking act as an amendment to the America COMPETES Act, which would grant legal and legitimate cannabis businesses fair banking access.

Additionally, Bloomberg reported that Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer will help back a new marijuana legalization bill, which he plans to introduce this month.

In a joint letter in February, Schumer, Senator Ron Wyden, and Senator Cory Booker called on their Democratic colleagues for further federal cannabis reform, saying, As more and more states move to legalize cannabis for both adult and medical use, the federal government has an important role to play.

This is an issue of individual freedom and basic fairness that clearly transcends party lines, the letter stated. Hundreds of millions of Americans live in states that have legalized cannabis in some form while it remains illegal at the federal level. This discrepancy leads to confusion and uncertainty and raises significant questions around criminal justice reform, economic development and small business growth, and public health and safety, all of which we believe require some type of federal answer.

As the letter pointed out, 18 states have already legalized the use of recreational marijuana and 37 states have legalized the use of medical cannabis since 2010.

The growing number of states legalizing the substance, combined with the newly proposed pieces of legislation signify a fundamental shift in attitude and an increased acceptance regarding use of the cannabis.

As the cannabis debate in Washington continues to drag out, states which have already legalized the substance have begun to profit off their legal marijuana markets and the lucrative taxes placed on the drug.

Furthermore, lawmakers and proponents of national pot reform have said it pays to legalize marijuana quite literally. But just how much money does the government stand to gain by greenlighting weed sales?

To better understand this, KOIN 6 News took a look at how local states are currently cashing in on the controversial crop and how much they are making off cannabis taxes.

The list below outlines how much Oregon and Washington made from marijuana sales tax, in addition to how both states spent those tax dollars last year.

Legalized medical marijuana: November 1998Legalized recreational marijuana: November 2014Retail sales began: October 2015

How Oregon taxes marijuana: Oregon has a 17% state retail tax on all recreational marijuana sales and an additional 3% tax for some Oregon locations

Cannabis Tax Revenue Generated in Oregon: According to the state website, Oregon brought in more than $178 million in total tax revenue from marijuana sales during the 2021 fiscal year.

How Oregon uses cannabis tax revenue: Tax revenue derived from Oregons marijuana sales fund the state programs administrative and enforcement costs, in addition to supporting the Drug Treatment and Recovery Service Fund. According to the state, any remaining revenue is divided to support the following programs:

Legalized medical marijuana: November 1998Legalized recreational marijuana: December 2012Retail sales began: July 2014

How Washington taxes marijuana: Washington State has an excise tax on cannabis sales of 37% as well as a statewide general sales tax of 6.5%, though some local taxes are also enforced.

Cannabis Tax Revenue Generated in Washington: For the 2021 fiscal year, Washington brought in $559.5 million in cannabis tax revenue, an increase of roughly 20% from the 2020 FY revenue.

How Washington uses cannabis tax revenue: According to the state, the bulk of Washingtons cannabis tax revenue is used to fund the states general fund and public health programs. Last year, cannabis revenue in the state helped fund the following:

See the rest here:

Cashing in on cannabis: How Oregon, Washington are using weed tax revenue - KOIN.com

Pathways to permanent housing

California lawmakers are currently considering a handful of bills that aim to improve outcomes for formerly incarcerated people by removing some of the most pressing collateral consequences of criminal convictions rules that keep people from accessing housing, employment, and other necessities.

Reports from the Prison Policy Initiative have revealed troubling statistics of reentry after prison.

One 2018 report showed that, in 2008, approximately 27 percent of formerly incarcerated people were looking for a job, but were still unemployed, a rate higher even than the general U.S. unemployment rate of 24.9 percent during the Great Depression. Yet people who had spent time in prison were also more likely to be actively seeking employment than the general population.

Another national study from PPI showed that formerly incarcerated people were nearly 10 times more likely to be homeless than the general public.

Two bills would widen the pathway to housing for people caught in a cycle of homelessness and incarceration.

The first bill, AB 2383, by Assemblymember Reggie Jones-Sawyer (D-Los Angeles), would prohibit landlords from seeking criminal history information from applicants during the first stage of the housing application process.

Background checks would also only be able to access information from the last seven years.

If a landlord, after conducting a background check during the secondary phase of screening, intended to deny an applicant based on their criminal history, the landlord would also have to provide the applicant with a written explanation for the potential denial within five days.

The potential renter would then have three days to give the landlord a letter either disputing the criminal history information or providing evidence of rehabilitation or other mitigating information. Then, the owner would be required to reconsider the applicant.

These rules do not apply, however, to owners renting out rooms, guest houses, or other housing on property where they the landlords reside.

AB 2383 is backed by the Anti-Recidivism Coalition, the Los Angeles Regional Reentry Partnership, and the Young Womens Freedom Center.

The bill has faced opposition from the California Association of Realtors, who argue that enacting the bill will endanger tenants who live in the complexes and properties formerly incarcerated people are applying to rent.

Yet, a coalition of justice reform groups, including All of Us or None, which seek to increase housing opportunities for formerly incarcerated people, oppose the bill in its current form for far different reasons. These opponents say landlords should be required to offer a conditional offer to an applicant before they can run a criminal background check.

Without a conditional offer, there is no way to prove that the applicant otherwise met the landlords criteria for credit and tenant history, the coalition argued. The advocates also point out that three days is not enough time for rental applicants to come up with rebuttals and supporting documents.

As of April 5, 2022, the bill was before the Assembly Judiciary Committee.

A second bill, AB-1816, from Assms. Isaac Bryan (D-Los Angeles) and Ash Kalra (D-San Jose), seeks to directly address the issues that allow people leaving prison to slip into homelessness.

The bill would create a state-level Reentry Housing and Workforce Development Program. This program would offer five-year renewable grants to counties, continuums of care and community-based organizations to fund evidence-based housing and housing-based services and employment interventions to allow people with recent histories of incarceration to exit homelessness and remain stably housed.

The money would fund long-term rental assistance, landlord incentives, including security deposits and holding fees, and more.

Recent data indicates it costs CDCR nearly $100,000 per inmate per year to incarcerate someone in a California prison, the Assembly Fiscal Committees summary of the bill noted. A chronically homeless person living unsheltered costs tax payers an average of $36,000 per year. The cost to provide permanent supportive housing, affordable housing coupled with services, costs an average of $20,000 per person per year and reduces the risk of recidivism sevenfold.

AB 1816 was revised and sent to the Assembly Committee on Appropriations on March 24, 2022.

Access to expungement

Bills focused on expanding access to criminal record expungement are also moving through the legislative committees.

One notable bill authored by Senator Scott Wiener, SB 1106, would ensure that unpaid restitution debt would not preclude an otherwise eligible person from clearing their record.

A persons poverty should not block them from having their record cleared, said Senator Wiener. Were forcing formerly incarcerated people into a cycle of debt that helps no one. If we want people to actually pay off their restitution debt, they need to be able to access housing and employment.

Wieners bill passed out of the Senate Public Safety Committee on March 24 and is currently on the Senate floor.

Broadening employment opportunities

Several other promising bills would address barriers to employment that keep formerly incarcerated people struggling to find work.

AB 2425, by Assm. Bryan, would provide stipends equivalent to the minimum wage to help formerly incarcerated Californians pay for their basic needs while they work toward obtaining credentials for high road careers in sectors like green-energy, healthcare, construction and infrastructure. Most of these credential programs are full-time, making it difficult for people to participate if they dont have another source of income.

The aptly named Hire UP: From Corrections to Career Pilot Program would be implemented through 10 community college districts throughout the state.

Another bill, AB 1720, would simplify and shorten the process for formerly incarcerated people to earn licenses through the California Department of Social Services allowing them to work in community care facilities.

AB 1720 is currently before the Assembly Committee on Higher Education.

Read more from the original source:

Bills Aim to Open Doors to Housing and Employment for Formerly Incarcerated Californians | - witnessla.com

(The Center Square) West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice ranked 33rd in a report that ranked every governor on his or her adherence to economic freedom and economic success, which places him in the bottom one-fourth of the country.

The report, conducted by the Americans Legislative Exchange Council, divided their ranking into three main categories: executive policy rank, economic performance rank and fiscal policy rank. Justice ranked 18th in the country for executive policies, but fell to 30th in fiscal policy and 47th in economic performance.

Gov. Justices below average ranking in the Governors Scorecard is due largely to West Virginias longtime position in trailing other states in economic performance in areas such as interstate migration and education quality, Jonathan Williams, ALECs chief economist and executive vice president of policy, told The Center Square.

Gov. Justices ranking is also brought down by the states welfare dependency -- a greater than average amount of state resources funding Medicaid and other welfare programs, Williams said. High per capita spending in West Virginia is another negative factor that brings Gov. Justice down in the rankings. However, Gov. Justice has made some impressive progress by signing a historic education freedom bill last year, which was championed in the legislature by Senator Patricia Rucker, and advocating for the elimination of a state income tax. We expect his ranking to improve in future years.

West Virginia ranked 47th for its unemployment rate, 44th in education quality, 35th in interstate migration and 34th in gross state product growth, which contributed to its low economic performance rating.

The state has high per-capita spending, ranking the seventh highest, and ranked the 20th highest for federal unemployment benefits. The state also ranked outside the top half for having a slightly higher than average personal income tax and corporate tax. However, the state had relatively low debt, ranking 16th lowest in this category. These factors contributed to the states fiscal policy ranking.

West Virginia also ranked as having the sixth highest welfare dependency, but had the sixth most education freedom and the least amount of union control, which led to its executive policy rank.

Garrett Ballengee, the executive director of the free-market Cardinal Institute, told The Center Square that West Virginia should pursue policies that increase economic freedom, which he said is the foundation of widespread prosperity.

West Virginia is not only in competition with neighboring states and its reputation for hostility to job creators but also the entire world -- we are but one small part in a global economy, Ballengee said. West Virginia should continue to look for ways to lower taxes, continue its drive towards cutting red tape and size of government, and ensure a level playing field for entrepreneurs and businesses looking to expand or locate in West Virginia. The record of history is quite clear that greater economic freedom equals a healthier, more prosperous society. West Virginia has made great strides in many of these areas in recent years, but it must double down."

The governors office did not respond to a request for comment.

See the rest here:

Gov. Justice ranks 33rd in economic freedom ranking - The Center Square

REE Automotive Inc

TEL AVIV, Israel, March 28, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- REE Automotive (REE) (Nasdaq: REE), an automotive technology leader and provider of electric vehicle (EV) platforms, today announced that it has filed its Annual Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021 with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC).

The report is available on the SECs website, at http://www.sec.gov and REEs Investor Relations website, at https://investors.ree.auto/.

Shareholders can obtain copies of REEs Annual Report on Form 20-F, free of charge, by making a request within a reasonable period of time to REEs Investor Relations Department at investors@ree.auto.

About REE Automotive

REE Automotive (Nasdaq: REE) is an automotive technology leader whose mission is to empower companies to build any size or shape of electric or autonomous vehicle from Class 1 through Class 6 for any application and any target market. REE aims to serve as the underpinning on top of which electric vehicles (EVs) and autonomous vehicles (AVs) will be built and envisions a future where EVs and AVs will be Powered by REE TM.

REEs revolutionary technology the REEcorner TM packs critical vehicle components (steering, braking, suspension, powertrain and control) into a single compact module positioned between the chassis and the wheel, enabling REE to build fully-flat EV platforms with more room for passengers, cargo and batteries. REE plans to use its proprietary X-By-Wire control technology to control each REEcornerTM of the vehicles with full drive-by-wire, brake-by-wire and steer-by-wire capabilities.

REEs EV platforms are designed to provide customers with complete freedom of design, enabling auto-manufacturers, OEMs, delivery & logistic fleets, Mobility-as-a-Service providers and new mobility players to design mission-specific EVs and AVs based on their exact business requirements and significantly reduce their time-to-market, lower total cost of ownership and comply with zero-carbon regulations.

Story continues

Headquartered in Glil Yam, Israel, REE has an Engineering Center in the UK, as well as subsidiaries in Japan and Germany, and plans to open its U.S. headquarters and first Integration Center in Austin, Texas. REEs unique CapEx-light manufacturing model leverages Tier-1 partners existing production lines; the companys extensive partner ecosystem encompasses leading names including Hino Motors (truck arm of Toyota), Magna International, JB Poindexter, Navya and American Axle & Manufacturing to provide a full turnkey solution.

REEs patented technology, together with its unique value proposition, position it to break new ground in e-Mobility. For more information visit https://www.ree.auto.

Contacts

Investor RelationsLimor GruberVP Investor Relations | REE Automotive+972-50-5239233investors@ree.auto

MediaCaroline HutchesonHead of Global Communications | REE Automotive+1-252-314-2028media@ree.auto

Caution About Forward-Looking Statements

This communication includes certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements regarding REE or its management teams expectations, hopes, beliefs, intentions or strategies regarding the future. In addition, any statements that refer to projections, forecasts or other characterizations of future events or circumstances, including any underlying assumptions, are forward-looking statements. The words aim anticipate, appear, approximate, believe, continue, could, estimate, expect, foresee, intends, may, might, plan, possible, potential, predict, project, seek, should, would and similar expressions (or the negative version of such words or expressions) may identify forward-looking statements, but the absence of these words does not mean that a statement is not forward-looking. All statements, other than statements of historical facts, may be forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements in this communication may include, among other things, statements about REEs strategic and business plans, technology, relationships, objectives and expectations for our business, the impact of trends on and interest in our business, intellectual property or product and its future results, operations and financial performance and condition

These forward-looking statements are based on information available as of the date of this communication and current expectations, forecasts, and assumptions. Although REE believes that the expectations reflected in forward-looking statements are reasonable, such statements involve unknown number of risks, uncertainties, judgments, and other factors that may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by forward-looking statements. These factors are difficult to predict accurately and may be beyond REEs control. Forward-looking statements in this communication speak only as of the date made and REE undertakes no obligation to update its forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future developments or otherwise, should circumstances change, except as otherwise required by securities and other applicable laws. In light of these risks and uncertainties, investors should keep in mind that results, events or developments discussed in any forward-looking statement made in this communication may not occur.

Uncertainties and risk factors that could affect REEs future performance and could cause actual results to differ include, but are not limited to: REEs ability to commercialize its strategic plan; REEs ability to maintain and advance relationships with current Tier 1 suppliers and strategic partners; development of REEs advanced prototypes into marketable products; REEs ability to grow and scale manufacturing capacity through relationships with Tier 1 suppliers; REEs estimates of unit sales, expenses and profitability and underlying assumptions; REEs reliance on its UK Engineering Center of Excellence for the design, validation, verification, testing and homologation of its products; REEs limited operating history; risks associated with plans for REEs initial commercial production; REEs dependence on potential suppliers, some of which will be single or limited source; development of the market for commercial EVs; intense competition in the e-mobility space, including with competitors who have significantly more resources; risks related to the fact that REE is incorporated in Israel and governed by Israeli law; REEs ability to make continued investments in its platform; the impact of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and any other worldwide health epidemics or outbreaks that may arise; and adverse global conditions, including macroeconomic and geopolitical uncertainty; the need to attract, train and retain highly-skilled technical workforce; changes in laws and regulations that impact REE; REEs ability to enforce, protect and maintain intellectual property rights; REEs ability to retain engineers and other highly qualified employees to further its goals; and other risks and uncertainties set forth in the sections entitled Risk Factors and Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements in REEs annual report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) on March 28, 2022 and in subsequent filings with the SEC.

Read more:

REE Automotive Ltd. Files Annual Report on Form 20-F for the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2021 - Yahoo Finance

Addressing lawmakers at his State of the State address in February, Gov. Chris Sununu pointed to one of the most pressing issues in the state: workforce housing. Then he presented a plan.

New Hampshire should take advantage of one-time pandemic relief funds and set aside $100 million to encourage housing development, Sununu said. His proposal to lawmakers included $30 million to incentivize towns to speed up approval processes, $60 million in grants for multifamily housing projects, and $10 million split between the demolition of outdated developments and zoning updates to encourage development.

These investments are critical to ensuring New Hampshire is the No. 1 destination in New England, Sununu said. This housing is for workers and families who work in our communities, go to our schools, and contribute to our economy.

A month later, housing advocates are zeroing in on a word not specifically mentioned in the governors plan: affordability. And as lawmakers prepare to receive the governors formal proposal expected to come before the Joint Legislative Fiscal Committee in April advocates are urging the governor to center the program around that standard.

These multifamily housing developments need to be affordable to the workforce of the residents of New Hampshire, said Elissa Margolin, director of Housing Action New Hampshire, in an interview.

What would failure look like? she added. I think failure would look like if these resources went to build really expensive places to live that already served people who have choice in the marketplace.

Some are less than optimistic.

The lack of a mention of affordable housing is a glaring omission from the governors plan, wrote Lisa Beaudoin and Tim McKernan, the executive director and director of policy and advocacy, respectively, at ABLE NH, a disability rights group, in an op-ed in the Concord Monitor this month. We cant simply build our way out of this crisis thinking that increasing the supply of market-rate housing will help the market overall, the two wrote.

At a press conference this month, Sununu said the housing proposal is meant to meet lower-middle income families. But the program is still being hammered out, he said.

I dont have a specific number in mind, said Sununu, when asked how affordable the chosen developments might be. But it really is more the affordability factor for rental units and reasonably priced rental units. We would probably lean on certain studies, demographics, average rental rates, things of that nature, to make sure that were meeting the supply where the demand is the greatest and I think thats for lower-middle income families.

New Hampshire could take two possible approaches when using federal money for housing based on the rules set out for the federal assistance funds, which come from the American Rescue Plan Act that passed Congress last year. And the states choice could have implications for affordability.

If the state uses the funds for direct expenses, newly updated federal guidelines state that they must be used to help either impacted households those who earn less than 300% of the federal poverty level or disproportionately impacted households those households earning less than 185% of the level.

As long as the funds targeted either income demographic, the state could use them to support affordable housing projects, according to the rules.

That low-income targeted approach could benefit a broad number of towns and cities in the state. Analysis released last week by the New Hampshire Fiscal Policy Institute found that 435,200 Granite Staters earn below 300% of the federal poverty guidelines or 33% of the state. Seventeen percent of state residents earn below 185% of the poverty level. This includes residents across the state, with Coos, Cheshire, and Grafton counties holding the highest proportions of lower-income residents. Rockingham and Merrimack counties hold the lowest.

But the state has another mechanism to spend the funds: revenue replacement. Under that approach, the state would not face those same income limitations, noted Phil Sletten, senior policy analyst at the Fiscal Policy Institute. As long as the funds are used to compensate for expenditures that qualify as government services, revenue replacement allows the state to fund initiatives with more freedom, Sletten said in an interview.

The revenue replacement dollars have more flexibility to be used for general government services than the dollars that are not revenue replacement, Sletten said. But the dollars would still have to be used for permissible purposes, and there are still requirements on the revenue replacement dollars as well.

State officials have indicated the state will take that second option.

We would be qualifying this program most likely under the revenue replacement categories, which would allow us to be able to have some level of flexibility in getting the funding into those types of projects, said Taylor Caswell, commissioner of the Department of Business and Economic Affairs, at the Fiscal Committee this month.

To Margolin, the exact mechanism the state uses to fund the housing is less important than its mission.

No matter what regulatory door the state decides to go to, I think its pretty clear that (the U.S.) Treasurys intent was that this money, in the housing space, be used for affordable options, she said.

The distinction is important, she said. Simply using the money to support housing might help the states meager housing supply but wouldnt be enough to make a difference on its own.

A conservative estimate is that were down 20,000 units, and you know, as much as $100 million is $100 million, its not going to get us 20,000 units. she said. In the end, thats not going to be solved and thats why affordability provisions are still needed.

Affordable housing could provide more targeted relief, Margolin said. The state should partner with existing nonprofit affordable housing organizations to help distribute the money, Margolin added, from NeighborWorks of Southern New Hampshire in Manchester to Lakes Region Community Developers in Laconia.

As the state moves forward with its $100 million proposal, officials say they are taking affordability concerns into account. The Business and Economic Affairs will be hiring three people to make up a small team of housing experts focused on developing and administering (American Rescue Plan Act) funded housing initiatives and generally supporting housing development in the state, after the Fiscal Committee approved a $1.5 million expense.

As for affordable housing, Caswell said the state will follow its own definition.

There are many different sorts of linguistic gymnastics that people perform when it comes to affordable housing, he told lawmakers. And I think our goal with this will be to accelerate and make more efficient the process of moving as many units as we can with this funding. The bulk of which we would want to see be in that middle income category.

For his part, Sununu stressed that the proposal was still in flux.

Were still kind of working out what the details are, he said at his press conference. Is it a six-month timeframe? Is that realistic? Maybe it has to be a little longer or can be a little shorter. What the dollar amounts are, the Legislature is going to have input on that.

Continued here:

Excited and wary of housing plan - Concord Monitor