Category Archives: Fiscal Freedom

The Senate general body meeting on March 25 discussed special allocations for Lunar Gala and recommendations for housing and bathroom changes to support the trans, intersex, and nonbinary (TIN) community.

Last weeks Senate general body meeting on April 1 discussed the work of the Commission on Academic Freedom and Freedom of Expression, adjusted fiscal budgets, and election ratification meetings.

Lunar Gala is an annual student-run fashion show with more than 130 people involved in its production. Because of COVID-19, the show will be virtual this year, and tickets to attend are free. They filmed their performance a week earlier and found that there were unexpected costs in renting the media equipment to film. The Joint Funding Committee (JFC) had previously allocated media equipment funds to Lunar Gala, and, under bylaws, the JFC was not able to reallocate funds for the same purpose, so Lunar Gala instead requested the Senate to fund their unexpected costs, which is permitted under bylaws. The special allocations request passed 13 to 0 to 1.

The Senate's Business Affairs Committee also introduced two resolutions in support of the TIN community. One resolution was endorsing a document written by Business Affairs in support of all-gender housing at Carnegie Mellon. The document recommends making all-gender housing the default option for students and making single-gender housing opt-in. It also recommends renovations to communal bathrooms in housing, such as making floor-to-ceiling bathroom stall walls, and changes to the roommate selection process to ensure the safety of TIN individuals against roommate violence through single-occupancy housing. The document stated that "An all-gender default resists societys current gender binary which is harmful to members of the TIN community, without inherently exposing cis- and gender-conforming students to violence." Business Affairs had conducted an earlier survey and found that 68 percent of the student body would either be interested in or would have no preference in all-gender housing. The resolution was passed 12 to 0 to 1.

Another resolution requested the Senate's endorsement of "Actionable Steps For All-Gender Equity at CMU," a document written by Carnegie Mellon's Trans, Intersex, and Nonbinary Alliance (TINA). In addition to wanting all-gender housing as described in the document written by Business Affairs, TINA requested renovating bathrooms in campus buildings to add all-gender single-stalled bathrooms to promote the safety of members of the TIN community, allowing for chosen and legal names and genders to be more easily updated within university information systems, promoting health resources and TIN bias training for students, and more. The resolution was passed 12 to 0 to 1.

Last week, guest speakers Roberta Klatzky and Jonathan Caulkins presented the work of the Commission on Academic Freedom and Freedom of Expression, created in response to the university-wide debate around the hiring and actions of Richard Grenell. They mentioned that there were three subcommittees within the commission: one for creating forums for discussion around the topic, one for discussing "points of discomfort," as Klatzky said, related to academic freedom and freedom of expression, and another for discussing policy creation related to the topic at Carnegie Mellon.

Senators asked the speakers questions about the diversity of the commission, the boundaries of acceptable speech at Carnegie Mellon, and whether hiring should consider social media platforms that hirees use and the audiences that they reach. The speakers asserted that departmental diversity had been taken into consideration when choosing the committee, the members of which are published online. Caulkins said that it was difficult to determine when to penalize academics for holding invalid beliefs that are unrelated to their field and that cases where academics did hold beliefs counter to norms in their field sometimes help promote scientific advances. Caulkins added that an issue the commission had to face when considering statements on social media in the hiring process is that hirers could be biased by the individual's personal life instead of solely considering professional qualifications.

The Finance Committee also presented a resolution on reducing Senate committee budgets for the fiscal year of 2021 due to COVID-19. Overall, the fiscal year budget for 2021 was reduced by about 40,000 dollars to a total of 160,000 dollars.

Senators also passed a resolution 19 to 0 to 1 affirming the resolution for a joint meeting of the Undergraduate Senate and Graduate Student Assembly. The meeting would ratify the results of the student government election, which is currently running, and elect the executive chair of the Activities Board. Students can vote in student government elections here.

More here:

Senate GBM Recap, March 25 and April 1 - CMU The Tartan Online

"Crazy." "Moron." "Lunatic."

In his memoir On the House, Former Speaker John Boehner dishes on his past colleagues in Congress with most of the harshest criticism directed at fellow Republicans. This becomes less surprising as he chronicles his slow burning disillusionment over the past decade with a GOP ultimately transformed and now defined by the ethos of former President Trump.

"I don't even think I could get elected in today's Republican Party anyway, just like I don't think Ronald Reagan could either," he concludes.

No one is more surprised by this than Boehner, a former Ohio congressman from working-class roots who was first elected to Congress 1990 as a firebrand conservative reformer. He helped expose internal corruption in the U.S. House, championed fiscal restraint, passed a lot of laws, and ultimately led a successful 20-year campaign to ban earmark spending once he became speaker. (Congress is now planning to reinstate earmark spending under Democratic control.)

Boehner resigned from Congress in 2015 on his own accord, but his decision came while under growing pressure from the right flank, led by then Rep. Mark Meadows, a North Carolina Republican, who viewed him as insufficiently conservative and was considering forcing a formal vote to oust him. Boehner delights in recalling how Meadows publicly voted against him for speaker, and then requested a private meeting, he writes, during which he got down on his knees and begged for forgiveness. "For a moment, I wondered what his elite and uncompromising band of Freedom Caucus warriors would have made of their star organizer on the verge of tears, but that wasn't my problem," Boehner writes. Meadows went on to become President Trump's last White House chief of staff.

A life-long and unapologetic smoker and drinker, the cover features Boehner sitting in what appears to be a dark bar, signature red wine in hand (merlot, preferably), with a lit cigarette in an ashtray. It sets the tone for a memoir that often reads like he's simply here to share some of his favorite tales over a couple of drinks. There's that time Moammar Gadhafi gave him a pair of sunglasses in the middle of the Libyan Desert. And the one about how he thought he had convinced Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia to be Bob Dole's running mate back during the 1996 presidential campaign. And how he'll never forget the look on former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's face when he told him "You can go f--k yourself" outside the Oval Office.

Boehner is candid but never cruel in his recollections, with the exception perhaps of Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, ("a reckless a--hole who thinks he is smarter than everyone else," he writes) who he loathes for his role in the 2013 government shutdown. Yet he prides himself on being a nice guy guided by a set of maxims, or "Boehnerisms" on how to treat people in life and in politics. "It doesn't cost anything to be nice," is one of them. It's the rising cruelty of modern politics that increasingly leaves him feeling out of touch with the angry and uncompromising pulse of the GOP. This is, after all, a lawmaker who loved working with the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, a Democrat from Massachusetts, "a great man and a great legislator" in his estimation.

The GOP's rabid hatred of former President Barack Obama, the 2010 Tea Party wave that swept in a class of uncompromising, anti-government novice lawmakers, and the rise of Donald Trump are all events Boehner recounts more as a helpless bystander despite being one of the most seemingly powerful Republicans in Washington. Time and time again, he recalls being powerless against the rising revolt inside the party towards any sign of legislative compromise, and towards the establishment he had come to represent. It's refreshing to read a memoir with a politician's honest accountings of repeated failures rather than self-inflated successes.

He takes issue with the certain ideas that Trump has unleashed there is no such thing as the "Deep State," and the press are not "the enemy of the people." By the end of the book, it's not hard to understand why he's no longer a party leader. It also includes some stark assessments from someone who served nearly three decades in government, climbing to the highest levels of power. "There are people we are electing who will destroy this country if we aren't careful," he warns. But Boehner offers no solutions or 10-point plans to get the country back on track. He's not the guy to ask anymore.

Susan Davis is a congressional correspondent for NPR. She covered Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, on and off from 2003 until his retirement in 2015.

Steve Inskeep is set to interview John Boehner about his memoir, airing on Morning Edition Monday, April 12.

Read more:

Former Speaker John Boehner's Memoir Serves As A Reflection On Life In 'Crazytown' - NET Nebraska

With COVID-19 forcing local city council and township board meetings online, technology problems have become the norm.Zoom

HOLLAND The Laketown Township Board of Trustees was in the midst of a roll-call foravote to approve the township's much-discussed budget for the next fiscal year includingdoubling the township's operating millage when they discovered a township trustee had disappeared from the Zoom meeting.

"Where's Jim Delaney?" asked Supervisor Linda Howell.

"He took off," responded a member of the public watching on Zoom.

The meeting was put on hold while a member of the public, also on Zoom, who had Delaney's cellphone number, called him.

Eventually, another board member, township Clerk Michelle Sall, managed to get Delaney on speaker phone so he could cast his vote on the township's $2.8 million budget through her Zoom connection.

The Laketown Township Board of Trustees meets over Zoom Wednesday, March 10, to approve the 2021-22 township budget.Carolyn Muyskens/Sentinel Staff

That made two of them. A second township trustee had already been relegated to voting via the township manager's cellphoneon speaker mode,after he lost connection earlier in the meeting.

With COVID-19 forcing local city council and township board meetings online, technology problems have become the norm, from the familiar refrains, "Can you hear me?" and "You're muted," to the off-kilter recitals of the Pledge of Allegiance which has proved impossible to say in unison over Zoom.

For that reason, and others, most local government representatives in the Holland area have been eager to get back to meeting in person when they can do so safely.

But some of the innovations forced by the COVID-19 pandemic may stick around, offering more ways for the public to access local government.

When stay-at-home orders were in effect in spring 2020, Holland City Council chose to keep meeting in person in city council chambers, where council members are distanced from each other.

Rather than bar in-person access to the meetings, which could be considered a violation of the Open Meetings Act, council strongly encouraged the public to view the meetings online and created a "virtual public comment" method an email address solely for public comment, publiccomment@cityofholland.com so that the public could still address the council without attending in person.

The city has long provided the public with remote access to its meetings through live broadcasts, available on Holland's public-access Holland Cable TV channel and on the city's YouTube page.

Mayor Nathan Bocks said he plans to keep the public comment email around after the pandemic ends.

It's provided another method for the public to communicate with council and make their concerns heard to the community, too public comments received this way are posted to the city's meeting portal along with other public documents.

And it may be less intimidating to some to write down their concerns than it would be to come to a council meeting, stand at the podium in front of nine council members and speak up.

For issues that generate a lot of public interest, the council gets dozens even hundreds of public comments sent to the email.

Jenn Manninen, left, and Jill DeJonge sit outside Holland City Hall Wednesday, Aug. 19, prior to the Holland City Council voting on an anti-discrimation ordinance.Brian Vernellis/Sentinel Staff

Maintaining public access to the business of local government during a pandemic is a difficult balancing act.

Challenges for the city of Holland over the past year included managing the crowds of residents who wanted to weigh in on a controversial expansion of the city's anti-discrimination protections in a new non-discrimination ordinance. Among the new protected classes were sexual orientation and gender identity a move which some Hollanders said threatened their religious freedom, while others, people who identify as LGBT and their friends and family, said the protections were necessary to make Holland a welcoming place for them.

At those meetings, and others where the council chambers has been unable to accommodate all of the members of the public who wanted to attend, the city organized a queue outside city hall for those waiting to speak to the council during public comment. Audio of the meeting was broadcast outside to those in line so they could follow what was happening.

The Michigan Department of Health and Human Services' orders in Novemberdid not exempt local government meetings from the restrictions on gathering. Thatforced city council to move to Zoom and, as soon as Gov. Gretchen Whitmer announced a relaxation of gathering rules in March, city council moved to meet in person again.

Other local municipalities went all virtual, and stayed that way, from the start. The city of Saugatuck, for example, shifted to Zoom meetings in the spring and has continued to meet virtually.

The Saugatuck City Council meets Wednesday to declare a local state of emergency, enabling the group to continue to meet remotely.Carolyn Muyskens/Sentinel Staff

This has led to an increase in public participation in meetings, with Zoom council meetings regularly drawing 30 to40 people to watch the council conduct business.

For Saugatuck, which has a small city hall, Mayor Mark Bekken called a special meeting over Zoom of the council to declare a state of emergency in the city to be able to continue meeting over Zoom after the Open Meetings Act authority to meet remotely expired April 1.

Case counts were still too high in the West Michigan area for the council to deem it safe to meet in person, and the council approved the local state of emergency unanimously.

In Ottawa County, the county board of commissioners extended a local state of emergency for the whole county, enabling all local government bodies to continue to meet remotely, if they choose to.

Holland Township had been gearing up to meet in person in April for the first time since budget deliberations in September, but once Ottawa County made it possible to meet virtually, the board decided to stay on Zoom for the month of April, due to the current rise in COVID-19 cases in West Michigan.

Holland Township first moved to an audioconferencing system in spring2020, before switching to the Zoom platform in the fall.

"There was a learning curve for each of those," said Holland Township Manager Steve Bulthuis, "but I think all parties involved, the board members, staff, as well as the public have all adapted to it very well and have all done their parts to continue to make the meetings participative and more efficient."

Bulthuis said he's received feedback from citizens that say it's more convenient to tune into a board meeting from a computer at home than make the drive to the township offices.

But what is convenient for technologically-savvy residents may be a barrier to access for other, older residents who do not have internet accessor arenot familiar enough with using a computer to join, Bulthuis worries.

Members of the Park Township Board of Trustees meet over Zoom Thursday, Dec. 10.

The Park Township Board of Trustees, by contrast, has adopted a hybrid model that allows board members and the public the choice to attend in person or to tune into the meetings over Zoom. A television screen set up in the board room, facing the other board members, displays the faces of the board members who are participating remotely.

Technology issues persist with this approach, and ultimately, most elected officials who have spoken up about the matter have said that meeting in person is better for getting the business of the township done, efficiently and transparently.

Without a local state of emergency in place due to COVID-19, local boards and councils will no longer legally be able to meet over Zoom.

But Park Township is expanding public's options to accessto its meetings, thanks to a proposal from Clerk Skip Keeter.

In years past, the Park Township Board of Trustees had discussed the idea of installing a camera systemto record meetings and make the videos available online but had rejected the idea. The township a decade ago had posted videos of its proceedings, but stopped the practice when it seemed little-used and costly.

Brought back to the boardlast month by Keeter, this time the idea was met with enthusiasm. On Thursday, the board approved an $8,000 investment in a camera system for the board room.

"The public has expressed some concerns about transparency, and by making recordings of themeetings available we should be able to answer their questions," Keeter said. "There's no light like sunlight, so if you shed light on everythingyou do and you're sharing it with the public, it should take away some ofthe qualms people have about our process with township government."

Though Keeter did not attribute the idea to the pandemic, the timing of the move lines up wellwithgathering restrictions still in place, even for government meetings,and rising COVID-19 cases in West Michigan.

"I can't tell you how much I hate Zoom meetings," Keeter said."I don't think COVIDnecessarily sped up the process, but I think it was moreresponding to our residents."

Contact reporter Carolyn Muyskens at cmuyskens@hollandsentinel.com and follow her on Twitter at @cjmuyskens.

Stories like this are possible because of our subscribers like you. Your support will allow us to continue to produce quality journalism.

Stay up to date by signing up for one of our newsletters.

Published11:06 am UTC Apr. 10, 2021Updated8:29 pm UTC Apr. 10, 2021

See original here:

Life after COVID: 'Can you hear me?' Local government forced to evolve in pandemic era - HollandSentinel.com

NASHVILLE, Tenn. Tennessee Governor Bill Lee is kicking off Second Chance Month by hosting a roundtable conversation on criminal justice policy with conservative thought leaders, including former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Newt Gingrich, former Governor Rick Perry, Pat Nolan, Brooke Rollins and Josh Smith.

Criminal justice reform is still somewhat of a conservative frontier, and with our strong proposals, we can reduce recidivism, save taxpayer dollars and make Tennessee communities safer, said Gov. Lee. I look forward to a thoughtful discussion on how Tennessee can lead the nation in balancing the notion of justice with the public safety outcomes we all expect.

The American Conservative Union Foundation (ACUF) has consistently scored legislation in states across the country similar to that which Governor Lee has proposed, said David Safavian, General Counsel for ACUF. We view the underlying tenets of his approach as built on conservative ideals of improving community safety, advancing human dignity, reducing wasteful spending and the belief in redemption.

Roundtable Discussion on Conservative Criminal Justice Reform

Wednesday, April 7

11:15 a.m. CT

About the Panelists:

Newt Gingrich: A fearless visionary and historian, Former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Newt Gingrich is one of the foremost economic, social, political, and security-focused conservative thinkers today. He is well-known as the architect of the Contract with America that led the Republican Party to victory in 1994 by capturing a majority in the United States House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years. Today, Newt is Chairman of Gingrich 360, a full-service American consulting, education and media production group that connects the past, present, and future to inspire audiences, solve challenges and develop opportunities.

Pat Nolan: Pat Nolan is the Director Emeritus of the American Conservative Union Foundations Nolan Center for Justice. Nolan is a leading voice on criminal justice reform, highlighting the skyrocketing costs of prison, fiscal responsibility in the criminal justice system and reforms for non-violent offenders. Nolan is the author of When Prisoners Return, which describes the important role of the Church in helping prisoners get back on their feet after they are released. He is a frequent expert witness at Congressional hearings on important issues such as prison work programs, juvenile justice, prison safety, offender reintegration and religious freedom.

Gov. Rick Perry: Rick Perry is a former United States Secretary of Energy, serving under U.S. President Trump from March 2017 to December 2019. Prior to joining the Administration as Secretary of Energy, Perry served as the 47th Governor of Texas. As Governor of the Lone Star State, Perry championed conservative principles including leading the nation in criminal justice reform efforts, which eventually became a national blueprint for reform.

Brooke Rollins: Brooke Rollins is an attorney who served as the acting director of the United States Domestic Policy Council under President Donald Trump and oversaw the White House Office of American Innovation. Rollins was president and CEO of the Texas Public Policy Foundation, an Austin-based free-market think tank, from 2003 through 2018. Rollins previously served as deputy general counsel, ethics advisor and policy director to Texas Governor Rick Perry.

Josh Smith: A Tennessean who was formerly incarcerated, Josh has spent the past 15 years actively involved in criminal justice reform in Kentucky, Virginia, Tennessee and countries in Central America. Smith has supported programs that provide hope, training and reentry support for prisoners and their families who earnestly want a new life, including hiring and mentoring many felons. In June of 2019 he was named to Tennessee Gov. Bill Lees Criminal Justice Reinvestment Task Force. He and his wife of 23 years, Tracy, are now driven to reshape the reality for offenders, from the time they enter prison through their re-entry.

###

View post:

Gov. Lee Hosting Newt Gingrich, Gov. Rick Perry and Conservative Policy Leaders - tn.gov

The District of Columbia Council unanimously passed, and on January 11 Mayor Bowser signed, The Ban on Non-Compete Agreements Amendment Act of 2020 the most aggressive prohibition against non-competition agreements in the country. When effective, the new law, which will apply to all employers with employees in the nations capital, will completely bar, with few exceptions, both post-employment covenants not to compete and non-competes that apply to current employees.

Under the District of Columbias unique home rule law, this legislation is likely to take effect after several subsequent steps occur. Its ultimate effective date may not be until October of this year, after the Districts annual budget is approved and takes effect.1

BACKGROUND

There has been a general trend in the past several years to restrain what many have considered as the overly aggressive use of post-employment non-competition agreements by some businesses to unnecessarily restrict employee movement. In response, a number of states have imposed limitations on their use:

However, in all cases at the state level at least, only post-employment non-competition covenants have been regulated, leaving employers free to forbid disloyal competitive activity by current employees. The new D.C. law bans this second kind of non-compete, as well as the first type.

THE D.C. LAWS PROHIBITIONS

In the likely event the D.C. law becomes effective, employers that operate in the District will not be permitted to require or request an employee to sign an agreement that contains a non-competition provision. The law declares that any non-competition provision contained in an employment agreement executed after the laws effective date shall be void as a matter of law and unenforceable.

The breadth of the laws prohibitions is illustrated by the wide scope of its definition of non-competition provision. A prohibited non-competition provision is defined as a provision of a written agreement between an employer and an employee that prohibits the employee from being simultaneously or subsequently employed by another person, performing work or providing services for pay for another person, or operating the employees own business.

In addition to forbidding contractual terms, the law also will prohibit employers from maintaining policies that prohibit[] an employee from: (1) [b]eing employed by another person; (2) [p]erforming work or providing services for pay for another person; or (3) [o]perating the employees own business.

Thus, clearly within the ambit of the laws prohibitions are commonly found contractual terms and employer policies that prevent an employee from simultaneously working for a competitor, and/or for any other employer, while they are employed with their primary employer.

While not explicit in the language of the D.C. law, by forbidding terms that prohibit employees from providing paid services to another person during their employment, it appears to make unlawful the standard clauses often used by businesses requiring employees to devote their full-time efforts to their position with and duties to that employer.

BAR AGAINST NON-COMPETES RESTRAINING CURRENT EMPLOYEES

Employers are likely to have concerns about being prevented from requiring current employees to refrain from competing with them during their employment, a common policy used by many businesses with good reason. The ban seemingly cuts against existing protections D.C. employers have under the common law duty of loyalty and fiduciary duties of officers and certain other employees.

The D.C. law will leave employers with few means for preventing acts of employee disloyalty, beyond merely responding to an act of disloyalty after the damage already has been inflicted. Where that disloyal act involves disclosure of a trade secret or other proprietary or confidential business information, any protection available to the employer necessarily would be incomplete: it is impossible to un-ring the proverbial bell. Once valuable information is disclosed, it cannot completely be recovered, making the damage permanent. By removing from the toolbox of employers an effective means of preventing disclosure to a competitor before it happens, the D.C. law will leave important interests of employers inadequately protected. In this regard, much may depend on any regulations that the Mayor may publish, as Section 104 of the law requires.

For example, at present, it is not clear whether the law will permit an employer to require a current employee to disclose the identity of other businesses for which the employee is providing services.2 Nor does the law address whether such an employer could contact a competitor for which its employee is working to warn it of consequences for using confidential information or trade secrets disclosed by that employee. These steps, along with the right to seek an injunction, would provide some measure of protection. However, until regulations are published and/or the law is interpreted by the courts, their availability is uncertain.

OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE LAW

Retaliation Prohibited. The D.C. law also contains broad anti-retaliation provisions. Under its provisions employers may not retaliate or threaten to retaliate against an employee for:

Notice to All Employees Required. All D.C. employers must provide written notice to their D.C. employees of the substance of the new law using the following language: No employer operating in the District of Columbia may request or require any employee working in the District of Columbia to agree to a non-compete policy or agreement, in accordance with the Ban on Non-Compete Agreements Amendment Act of 2020.

Such notice must be provided:

Given the burden imposed by the strict timelines mandated for notice-giving under the law, it is easy to foresee a raft of unintentional violations of the notice provisions, each of which would subject the offending employer to liability for civil penalties (discussed below).

Record-Keeping Required. The Act requires the Mayor to issue rules to implement the Act, including rules requiring employers to keep and retain records relating to compliance with the Act. These rules have not yet been promulgated.

EMPLOYERS RETAIN SOME PROTECTIONS

Existing Agreements are Grandfathered. The D.C. law will apply prospectively only, so non-competition covenants that already are in place on the laws effective date can be enforced if lawful under D.C.s pre-existing common law standards.

Lawful Non-Disclosure Restrictions Remain Enforceable. The law expressly preserves the right of D.C. employers to protect confidential, proprietary, or sensitive information, [a] client list, customer list, or a trade secret if its non-disclosure restriction is otherwise lawful. As noted above, however, this ostensible protection will be incomplete if an employer cannot restrain its employees from working for competitors, as will be the case once the law becomes effective.

Exception for Sale of a Business Retained. Likewise, the law explicitly permits [a]n otherwise lawful provision contained within or executed contemporaneously with an agreement between the seller of a business and one or more buyers of that business wherein the seller agrees not to compete with the buyers business.

Narrow Exception Created for Medical Specialists. The law permits providers of medical services to require non-competition clauses in employment agreements with physicians, but imposes advance notice and minimum salary conditions, among others.

Status of Non-Solicitation Agreements is Not Clear, but May be Unaffected. Oddly, while the law is very detailed in many respects, it makes no specific mention of agreements not to solicit customers and/or employees despite the importance and common usage of such terms by employers. Thus, it would appear that such agreements are not affected by the law and continue to be enforceable under existing common law standards. One may argue, though, that non-solicit agreements are simply a form of non-compete, and should be treated as such under the new D.C. law. Greater clarity is needed on this important question.

ENFORCEMENT AND REMEDIES

The law offers both administrative and judicial enforcement vehicles. Aggrieved employees can file suit and seek damages and attorneys fees for violations of the law. In addition to damages and attorneys fees, the law provides for assessment of civil penalties of between $500 to $3,000 per proven violation including violations of notice and record-keeping requirements in civil actions brought by employees.

Alternatively, complaints of violations may be filed with the Mayor, who, along with the Attorney General, is charged with enforcement authority. The Mayor is empowered to assess an administrative penalty of from $350 to $1,000 for each violation of the law, but for each violation of its anti-retaliation provisions the penalty assessed against an employer must be $1,000. Before being subject to an administrative penalty, the employer is entitled to notice and an opportunity for a formal hearing.

WHAT NOW?

D.C. Employers. Prudent employers in the District must assume that the D.C. law banning non-competition agreements will become effective in the near future and should begin the process of modifying employment agreements and policies for future use. Fortunately, as long as non-solicitation agreements are deemed permissible under the law, tools remain to protect most legitimate business interests. A combination of carefully crafted non-disclosure (NDA) and non-solicitation agreements safeguarding an employers customers and employees should offer a good measure of protection for its goodwill and proprietary information from illicit disclosure and use by current and former employees.

Employers may be justified in arguing that only a non-compete effectively mitigates the prospect that a former employee, or a current employee planning to leave, and a grasping competitor will conspire to steal its proprietary information, customer goodwill and employees, and that NDAs and non-solicits protect them only after information or customers already have been stolen. However, the D.C. Council and legislatures of three states have made a policy decision that the cost to employees and the public outweighs the interest of employers.

All U.S. Employers. It appears that it is not only D.C. employers who must be on high alert for the imminent demise of post-employment non-compete restrictions on employees who are newly hired or execute new employment agreements. All employers nationwide should brace themselves for a re-energized campaign at the federal level, led by President Biden, to curb, if not extinguish, the use of post-employment non-competition agreements in the employment setting.

In its waning days, the Obama White House published a call to action urging state legislatures to curb the use of non-competes at the state level, arguing that such restrictions suppressed wages. At around the same time, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Antitrust Division of the Justice Department released guidance for human resources professionals on recognizing collusive wage practices among employers and promising to act against such collusion. While some states responded by enacting laws to restrict non-competes (discussed above), during his campaign President Biden made the elimination of most non-competition agreements by the federal government a policy goal of his administration.

Even during the Trump Administration, the FTC conducted public workshops to examine whether there is a sufficient legal basis and empirical economic support to promulgate a Commission Rule that would restrict the use of non-compete clauses in employment contracts. In addition, the Justice Department filed a number of antitrust actions against employers, including several Silicon Valley giants, that entered into no-poaching agreements

In addition to action taken and promised by the executive branch, The Workforce Mobility Act was first introduced in both houses of Congress in 2018 to ban most employee non-compete agreements. It was reintroduced in 2019 as S. 2614 and H.R. 5710, both of which had bi-partisan sponsorship. Hearings were held in the Senate, but the bill failed to advance. Separately, Sen. Marco Rubio introduced his own bill in 2019, the Freedom to Compete Act, to limit the application of non-competes to exempt employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act, but no formal action was taken. New federal legislation is expected to be introduced during this Congressional session.

CONCLUSION

In sum, the new D.C. law is probably indicative of a wave of even broader restrictions in the near future. Whether in the form of forthcoming administrative or legislative action, it seems likely that non-competition agreements may be subjected to federal regulation and perhaps largely banned or severely restricted nationwide.

While employers will have to adjust to this new reality should it come to pass, a combination of well drafted non-disclosure and non-solicitation policies should offer necessary protection for legitimate business interests.

Moreover, national and multi-state employers may actually welcome a federal solution to replace the existing patchwork of state common law and statutory rules that govern restrictive covenants. Although federal rules would not entirely eliminate differences from state to state as the D.C. Councils recent action in banning restrictions on current employees illustrates, they would at least reduce the complexity of this area of law.

1 First, there is a 30-day Congressional review period after the laws transmittal to Congress, during which Congress can object by joint resolution and which President Biden would then need to sign to keep the law from taking effect. Given the Presidents outspoken opposition to non-competition agreements, even if Congress unexpectedly were to formally object to the law, it is highly unlikely that the President would agree to that objection. The ban on non-competes, therefore, seems virtually certain to become effective this year, likely upon the effective date of the Districts approved annual budget, which could occur as late as October 1, 2021. (D.C. law requires that for a new law to become effective, its fiscal effects must be presented when the annual budget is considered by the D.C. Council).

2 If an employer is to exercise the right to protect its confidential business information through lawful means, as the law provides (see below), such disclosure would be essential.

[View source.]

Read the original post:

A Sign Of Things To Come? D.C. Bans Employee Non-Competes That Apply To Current Employees And To Post-Employment Activity - JD Supra

KNHAP press release| Hays Daily News

The grassroots Kansas Nebraska Heritage Area Partnership (KNHAP), a diverse, bi-state partnership of cultural, historical, economic development and tourism organizations and individuals, has formed in hopes of establishing a National Heritage Area within 49 counties between North Central Kansas and South Central Nebraska.

The mission of the Kansas Nebraska Heritage Area Partnership is to connect communities and attractions, instill pride of place, and promote immersive experiences for residents and visitors to enhance appreciation for the regions unique landscape and nationally significant cultural history.

Heritage tourism is considered one of the fastest-growing segments in the tourism industry and equates to a $171 billion annual spend. The National Trust defines heritage tourism as travel to experience the places, artifacts, and activities that authentically represent the stories and people of the past and present. It includes cultural, historic and natural resources (National Trust for Historic Preservation, 2008).

Eighty-one percent of U.S. tourists are considered cultural tourists, and 56 percent of the U.S. population indicated it included at least one cultural, arts, historic or heritage activity or event while on a trip in the past year. Historical places and museums rank top on the list of activities at a destination (66 percent), followed by cultural events and festivals (45 percent).

Heritage tourists travel to destinations that are off the beaten path. They are in search of authentic experiences and want to learn something new during their travels. (https://www.buses.org/news/article/insider-exclusive-heritage-toursim-facts-figures)

Cultural tourists spend more and stay longer: The average spend per cultural tourist is 60 percent more at approximately $1,319 per trip, as compared to $820 for the traditional, domestic leisure traveler. Cultural tourists take 3.6 trips vs. 3.4 trips annually. (https://www.buses.org/news/article/insider-exclusive-heritage-toursim-facts-figures)

KNHAP Origins

The Willa Cather Foundation partnered with the University of Nebraska-Lincoln in 2016 to explore regional heritage tourism strategies to bring more tourists into the area. This process began as an exploratory University of Nebraska-Lincoln undergraduate landscape architecture studio.

The study sought to understand the ways to increase economic development through a more regional approach to cultural heritage tourism. The study area was established based on a series of user profiles and their interest in traveling a distance of two hours and spending up to three days experiencing a myriad of local resources including museums, public parks, golfing, restaurants and so on.

A team of nine students collected information on cultural-related sites, including food, lodging and other basic tourism services, and intangible features such as the arts, religion and culture. Students also collected information in the study area and discovered the wealth of interesting cultural, historic, and environmental resources.

At a community meeting and based on this inventory, a group of community participants suggested we explore a National Heritage Area. The students spent three weeks understanding the requirements associated with becoming a National Heritage Area (NHA). After the project ended in May 2017, a group of interested community citizens and directors of museums and foundations met with the National Park Service (NPS) to understand in more detail the process and requirements of becoming a NHA.

NHAs are administered by NPS coordinators in Washington DC and six regional offices - Anchorage, San Francisco, Denver, Omaha, Philadelphia and Atlanta - as well as park unit staff. NHAs are not national park units. Rather, NPS partners with, provides technical assistance, and distributes matching federal funds from Congress to NHA entities. The NPS and NHA do not assume ownership of land inside heritage areas or impose land use controls.

The Willa Cather Foundation and the University of Nebraska-Lincoln convened partners and stakeholders in both states for a series of meetings to discuss the NHA concept and make recommendations about whether to establish a nonprofit and raise funds for a feasibility study to further explore the concept of a NHA designation.

In 2017, a volunteer board was formed to explore opportunities, define its mission and look at initial feasibility. These volunteers have initial beliefs, in part based on the students' research, that there are nationally significant heritage themes regarding: Settlement and Migration, Homesteading, Development of Land, Native Americans, Nature.

KNHAPs goal is to build a network for heritage sites, museums, CVBs, cities, and counties that wish to participate in this volunteer effort. This network would collaboratively work together in marketing the regions existing attractions with unified themes.

Matching federal funding can provide tourism professionals and organizations with professional development opportunities as well as funding for new marketing initiatives and projects related to the themes.

In the future the network aims to promote the entire region to tourists ranging from bird watchers on the Platte River near Kearney, Nebraska to the Pony Express Station in Marysville, Kansas to the Homestead National Monument in Beatrice, Nebraska, or the National Orphan Train Complex in Concordia, Kansas.

As a network working together, the aim is to draw more people off of I-70 and I-80 that can help serve as a catalyst for economic development through heritage tourism.

National Heritage Area Facts

In 1984, the first National Heritage Area, Illinois and Michigan Canal National Heritage Area, was signed into law by President Ronald Reagan. In his dedication speech, Reagan referred to National Heritage Areas as a marriage of heritage conservation, recreation, and economic development. Every administration since Reagan has had a hand in creating the 55 existing NHAs in the US.

One area is Freedom's Frontier National Heritage Area, which encompasses 29 eastern Kansas and 12 western Missouri counties and preserves, interprets and promotes stories of the Missouri Kansas Border War and enduring struggles for freedom. Visitors are invited to explore nearby museums, archives, libraries, historic sites and other attractions in either Kansas or Missouri to learn about the events that led to the Civil War and experience from many viewpoints the strong freedom story that runs along the Missouri Kansas border.

National Heritage Areas commemorate, conserve, and promote important natural, scenic, historic, cultural, and recreational resources. National Heritage Areas are partnerships among the National Park Service, states, and local communities, in which the National Park Service supports state and local conservation through federal recognition, seed money, and technical assistance.

Unlike lands within the National Park System, which are federally owned and managed, lands within heritage areas remain in state, local, or private ownership or a combination thereof. NHA Management plans require the locally led board and staff to outline marketing work, their partner relationships, educational services, and grant work for museums and heritage sites. Laws establishing national heritage areas often contain provisions intended to address concerns about potential loss of, or restrictions on use of, private property resulting from National Heritage Area designation.

For example, Public Law 116-9, which established the six newest National Heritage Areas and was signed into law by President Donald Trump on March 12, 2019, included various private property provisions. These provisions stated that designation of the new National Heritage Areas would not abridge the rights of any property owner; require any property owner to permit public access to the property; alter any land use regulation; or diminish the authority of the state to manage fish and wildlife, including the regulation of fishing and hunting within the National Heritage Area.

Supporters see National Heritage Areas as generally more desirable than other types of land conservation. They often prefer the designation of National Heritage Areas to other federally established designations, because the lands remain in nonfederal ownership and are administered locally. In March 2021 the Congressional Research Office released a report providing facts about NHAs: (https://fas.org/sgp/ crs/misc/RL33462.pdf).

National Heritage Area Funding National Heritage Areas might receive funding from a wide variety of sources. Congress typically determines federal funding for National Heritage Areas in annual appropriations laws for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies. National Heritage Areas can use federal funds for many purposes, including staffing, planning, and executing projects.

The fiscal year 2021 appropriation for the National Park Service for assistance to heritage areas was $23.9 million, including $22.9 million for grantmaking and direct support and just over $1 million for administrative support. National Heritage Areas leverage an average of $5.50 in public-private partnership funding for every $1.00 of federal investment which aids in creating jobs, generating revenue for local governments, and sustaining local communities through revitalization and heritage tourism.

The Board of Directors for the Kansas Nebraska Heritage Area Partnership is currently working to establish non-profit status in both states and gather the funding necessary for a feasibility study. The feasibility study provides the U.S. Congress and the National Park Service with the information they need to determine if designation is suitable.

What National Heritage Areas Are Not

With the change of administration and new policies being introduced, some may have confused National Heritage Areas as being tied to the 30x30 initiative. These are not related in any way. With 55 designated NHAs over a span of 37 years, there is not a single case of any land rights being impacted. National Heritage Areas are not national park service units. An NHA designation does not affect private property rights or impose land use controls, nor can it assume any ownership of land inside its defined boundary. All individuals, organizations, and/or towns within the area have the choice to participate voluntarily to enjoy the benefits of an NHA or remain autonomous.

KNHAP is providing educational webinars via Zoom and Facebook, called the Rural Tourism Series, twice each month. The hour-long presentations feature panelists from each state, KNHAP board members, and topic experts. In 2021 the webinar featured speakers from Kansas Tourism, Nebraska Tourism Commission, Nebraska Main Street Network, Kansas By-way and Agritourism, Nebraska Game & Parks Commission, Freedoms Frontier NHA, Kansas Sampler Foundation, Homestead National Monument, and more.

For more information about Kansas Nebraska Heritage Area Partnership follow them at http://www.facebook.com/KNHeritage, or contact Executive Director Kim Wilson at kwilson4@unl.edu or (765) 427-9643.

KNHAP Board: Ashley Olson - Willa Cather Foundation NE, Jenna Bartja - Nebraska Tourism Commission NE, Carol Schlegel - McCook/Red Willow Tourism NE, Roger Jasnoch - Visit Kearney NE, Luke Mahin - Republic County Economic Development KS, Kelly Gourley - Lincoln County Economic Development KS, Shaley George - National Orphan Train Complex KS, Kyle Peterson - Mitchell County Historical Society Museum KS, Caryl Hale, Norton KS, Jarrod McCartney - Red Cloud Tourism & Commerce NE, Sue Stringer - Kansas Agritourism KS, Kristin Malek - University of Nebraska - Lincoln NE, Kim Wilson - NE Executive Director of KNHAP University of Nebraska - Lincoln.

Read more:

Study will look at N. central Kans. and S. central Nebr. for heritage area - Hays Daily News

GILLETTE, Wyo. (AP) When Aaron Cannon and his family began looking to relocate last year, they had their eye out West.

The idea of moving to Wyoming was appealing for several reasons, but leaving the changing social and cultural tension in his hometown of Raleigh, North Carolina, became the deciding factor for the move.

I thought, I cant live with the crazies anymore, enough of this stuff, Cannon said.

Of all the places not named Raleigh, North Carolina, he settled on Gillette, Wyoming, thousands of miles from where hed lived his whole life.It helped that his brother, Stephen, had made the move with his own family from North Carolina to Gillette about a month before, the Gillette News Record reports.

The Cannons arent alone.

Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, the local real estate industry has experienced an uptick in out-of-state buyers drawn to Wyoming for its wide open spaces, relatively low cost of living and, in many cases, social landscape different from other more politically and socially polarized parts of the country.

We have seen an influx in buyers coming from multiple parts of the country, moving to Gillette and Campbell County for a multitude of reasons, said Audrey Lubken, a loan officer for First National Bank of Gillette.

For Aaron, 43, it was a little bit of everything about Wyoming that drew his interest.

We can work from anywhere, really anywhere in the world, Aaron said. We went state by state. We love Wyomings history, its politics, its people.With more than 20 years of catering experience, Aaron is opening Ranch and Roost, a burger and fried chicken joint serving up seriously elevated grub alongside Big Lost Meadery.

His brother, Stephen, also found plenty to like about Gillette.

Stephen and Tamara Cannon made the move with their two school-age kids after vetting other parts of the state. Aaron and his family did a similar Wyoming tour last summer, checking out towns and feeling out which one felt like home.

While Gillette may not be as lush and mountainous as Wyoming postcards often depict, it has a larger population than the small mountain towns, and it has good schools, community amenities and solid internet connection, which was important for Stephen and Tamara, who both work remotely.

But with all of the given reasons to move to Gillette, several out-of-state buyers and those in the local real estate industry said that one of the primary reasons seems to be people seeking to get away from the social and cultural climate that escalated this past year with the pandemic.

Were not looking for everybody to agree with us, we just want to be left alone, Stephen said.

The market heats up

When the pandemic first began to upend day-to-day life throughout the United States last March, people in real estate, like most industries, did not know what to expect.

In the months leading up to March 2020, Realtor Pat Avery of Pat Avery Real Estate in Gillette said the market was doing well in Campbell County.

Then the pandemic struck, and I thought, Im not going to sell many homes here, Avery said. Then the opposite happened.

With a nation hunkering down inside their homes in March, it was unclear if people would want to buy new ones during such an uncertain time.

What happened in March was kind of as expected, Avery said. We had a decrease in the number of homes put under contract. And then, by April it seemed like people were coming out again.

There were the initial logistical concerns of how to show a house in the age of social distancing. Hand sanitizer and gloves were implemented at first. He said sometimes all of the lights were turned on inside a house in advance to avoid unnecessary touching. Eventually, Avery said people became more comfortable with the idea of letting strangers inside to view their homes.

That was especially true as the number of homes on the local market began to shrink and their values increased.

Before the pandemic, there already had been somewhat of a decrease in the number of homes for sale in the Gillette area, Avery said.

In February 2017, there were 367 residential properties for sale in Gillette. Then in February 2018, there were 303 homes on the market, followed by 261 at the same time the next year.

By February 2020, just before the pandemic hit stateside, there were 179 residential listings, a low number but not unheard of given the winter months often being relatively slow for real estate in general.

Since then, the number of homes for sale has stayed down as low interest rates and out-of-state interest have helped fuel a sellers market.

For example, in September 2019, there were 281 residential homes listed in Gillette, Avery said. As of March 15, there were 141 homes on the market, 111 of which were under contract, according to data from Re/Max.

The average list price increased to $251,757 from $234,710 a year ago, based on the prior six months average. Sale prices also rose significantly, increasing to $243,450 this year from $222,262 last.

Although the average days on market has stayed fairly consistent from this time last year, according to data from Re/Max, the length varies depending on the propertys price range.

Its certainly fewer days on the market than typical, Avery said.

Low stock

Laura Wilkinson, a Realtor with ERA Priority Real Estate and the Northeast Wyoming Real Estate Alliance Board president, said there are many reasons for the reduced inventory.

There are sellers looking to upgrade from their starter to forever homes, then there are retirees who want to downsize or relocate. Thats in addition to the out-of-staters seeking a different way of life in Wyoming.

But as is often the case, sellers also become buyers. So those looking to sell, and with houses leaving the market quickly, have less time and fewer options to buy their next homes.

For that dormant market of sellers, who would then be pushed to buy quickly, Wilkinson said the market is almost too hot to touch.

I have some people who are ready to sell, whether they want to upsize, downsize or whatever, theres just nothing in the market right now, Wilkinson said. They live in the type of home people are looking for, so when they go to list, it probably wont sit long.

Further stoking the flames are low interest rates, which came in response to the pandemic to entice borrowers and have held up through the past year.

Ive been in real estate 40 years now and Ive never seen interest rates as low as they were, Avery said. And theyre still really low.

The interest rates fell to about 2.5% at their lowest, but can still be gotten for around 3% for many conventional 30-year mortgages, said Audrey Lubken, loan officer at First National Bank of Gillette.

For a six-figure, 30-year investment, the low interest rates could save buyers thousands of dollars in the long-run or give them a longer leash when deciding how much they can afford to spend.

Over the past year weve seen the lowest interest rates weve seen in a long time, which has increased the number of people in the market, Lubken said.

The low interest rates give buyers more spending power and sellers leverage on their asking prices, with the sum total equating to houses sold more quickly and at higher prices.

For some out-of-state buyers, the real estate boom has allowed them to sell their homes well above what they paid, then spend that money in Wyoming, where their dollar stretches further.

But when transitioning from North Carolinas real estate market to Wyomings, Aaron and his family entered a pricier market than back East.

Where we came from, it was a sellers market. When we bought here in December, its a sellers market, Aaron said. We spent considerably more for the same house and property than we would have back in North Carolina.

However, Matt McKinley, 35, said he recently sold his home outside of Portland, Oregon, for about twice what he paid for it seven years ago. Now hes looking to northeast Wyoming to buy a new home outright, escape growing social issues and live in a state with better hunting.

In the meantime, he remains in Oregon waiting for the right home in Campbell County, preferably something more rural, he said. Although he has not lined up a job in Wyoming yet, as a welder, he said finding work shouldnt be an issue.

The move has been a long time coming, but the past year accelerated the timeline, he said.

From talking to my Realtor, shes saying there are a lot less homes on the market now than normal because there are a lot more people like me moving there, McKinley said.

Why Wyoming?

Even before the pandemic began, Kim and Tony Ware started planning their move from Washington state. In doing so, Wyoming quickly became their target landing spot.

We wanted to get away from the political climate there, Kim said. Were more with the conservative politics here; the freedom to not have any neighbors looking at us, wide open skies, less people.

But uprooting their lives in the Pacific Northwest wasnt an overnight process.

First, they had to sell their house in Washington, which Kim said lasted all of one day on the market before getting more than they paid for it.

Then, there was work to consider. Tony had a job of 20 years in the oil and gas industry in Washington and found a job in Wyoming the first week they were in town.

Finally, the couple moved to their new Wyoming home on 26 acres of land in September.

It was a work in progress, Kim said. It took us about a year.

With his 40 acres of Campbell County land, Stephen Cannon said he and his family hope to start a small farm and gradually grow it over the years. He may even raise chickens to one day supply his brothers restaurant down the street.

It took a lot for Stephen and his family to feel the need to move away from Raleigh, but now that they have, he said he is happy with where they landed, imperfections and all.

Everything we came out here for I think we found, without realizing theres still quite the political battle, Stephen said.

But its a different battle from the front fought in their former home. The debates over fiscal policy, school funding and state budget cuts are quaint compared with the deep-seated societal and cultural strife in his former metropolitan area back East.

Although Wyoming, with its vast vistas, modest population and mostly unilateral political leanings may differ from some other swaths of the country, it is not as far removed from broader society as the nearly 2,000-mile drive inland may have first suggested for the Cannons.

Trying to predict how much longer the strong real estate market in Wyoming and the rest of the country will last may be a fools errand, but it also made the past year for many feel like a wise time to rush in.

Before the chips fell, we wanted to be out where we needed to be, Stephen said.

Read the original here:

Moves to Wyoming pick up during COVID-19 pandemic - East Idaho News

With help from Myah Ward

Construction continues on a new $463 million Nice/Middleton Bridge in Newburg, Md. | Getty Images

WHAT THAT WORD REALLY MEANS It is the argument consuming Washington. People debate it through masks in the parks. Keyboard warriors take to their stations and rapid-fire memes and arguments. Families torn asunder over a simple question: What does infrastructure mean?

OK, maybe the split families are a bit of a stretch. But as President Joe Biden tries to get his multi-trillion dollar infrastructure package through the Senate, the definition of the word has become part of the towns wonk talk. What gets to be called infrastructure? Roads and bridges, clearly. But what about the child care that enables parents to use those roads and bridges on their way to work?

To find the answer, Nightly decided to go to the source: the dictionary. Well, the people who write the dictionary, and who write about the English language. Here are their lightly edited answers:

The meaning of infrastructure currently under debate is the one defined in the dictionary at Merriam-Webster.com as:

the system of public works of a country, state or region; also the resources (such as personnel, buildings or equipment) required for an activity

The Latin roots of infrastructure mean simply underneath or below the structure, and the English word has both concrete (physical infrastructure, transportation infrastructure) and abstract uses (social infrastructure). Note that the definition above is broad enough to cover both, and also that it encompasses the resources, organization and personnel who will do the work of infrastructure. An organized system for building is itself a necessary structure.

Public works refers to schools, bridges, parks and highways, but also includes telephone lines, water systems, and the delivery of electricity and broadband. It includes anything constructed for public use or enjoyment especially when financed and owned by the government.

Even our original definition of infrastructure, from its first published entry in a Merriam-Webster dictionary in 1955, described the underlying foundation or basic framework of an organization or system,and so was not limited only to the construction of roads and bridges. The term came to English from French because of the military NATO use thats what got the word into the papers. Peter Sokolowski, lexicographer, Merriam-Webster

Id say that infrastructure is a word that has its uses but should be avoided where possible by people trying to be careful and accurate with their words, because of its expansiveness. People may not be talking about the same things when they talk about it, because it has the double fault of being Latinate (its roots mean below-building, so technically it should refer to things under our feet like roads and sewers and water pipes, but nobody knows or cares) and abstract. You can stub your toe on a bridge but not on infrastructure.

I was surprised just this morning to find billions for care homes in the infrastructure bill not that they arent important, but they arent what I think of as infrastructure. Id even say the same about schools and research: critically important, but not in my definition of infrastructure.

When making the case for something you want to spend money on, it can often be better to talk about concrete things people can see in their minds eye: roads, bridges, railroads, ports, airports. Even if they cant picture the electrical grid, they know what it is and why its important. But for politicians, expansive and slippery terms are often part of the point. There will be massive pet-project spending in the infrastructure bill if it passes. So vague terms like infrastructure are part of a necessary evil in politics. But its not the best word when you want to be clear and concrete.

A sidebar but a useful comparator: Linguist George Lakoff counsels Democrats not to talk about the environment, because what the hell is that? Talk about clean air, clean water, national parks, endangered species or whatever you're focusing on wherever possible, because everyone loves clean air and adorable endangered animals. Its advice I repeat myself in writing advice constantly: Be concrete, not abstract. Your words land when people can practically see, touch, smell and feel them. Lane Greene, language columnist for The Economist

Welcome to POLITICO Nightly. Reach out with news, tips and ideas for us at [emailprotected] and [emailprotected], or on Twitter at @tweyant and @renurayasam.

A message from UnitedHealth Group:

Greater diversity among health care professionals can improve patient care, leading to better health outcomes. Thats why UnitedHealth Group is investing in a 21st century health workforce that ensures all communities have access to high-quality care. Learn more.

TRUMPS PATH BACK TO FACEBOOK If former President Donald Trump manages to get back on Facebook and Instagram this month, his win will rest on a series of close calls.

Facebooks oversight board is expected to rule within the coming weeks on whether to uphold or overturn Trumps indefinite suspension, which the social network imposed after the Jan. 6 Capitol riots over fears he might incite further violence. So far, the panel of scholars, lawyers and other outside experts has bucked Facebooks judgment in five of the six decisions it has rendered, Cristiano Lima writes.

But Trumps case stands out from that early grab-bag of content disputes, in which the board ordered Facebook to reinstate posts such as an insult against Muslims in Myanmar, a quote misattributed to Joseph Goebbels and a users criticism of the French government for disallowing unproven Covid-19 cures. And free speech and legal experts tracking the debate say the former president would need a series of interpretations by the group to break his way to regain his megaphone on the worlds biggest social network.

The key factors, these people said, will include whether the board thinks Facebook set clear enough rules and gave Trump a fair shake. Another will be what kind of case the board thinks its weighing a narrow, legalistic dispute about one persons freedom of expression or a broader one about the publics right to safety.

The board, often likened to Facebooks Supreme Court, has the power to overrule decisions even by top executives like CEO Mark Zuckerberg. Its ruling on Trump will be the groups highest-profile yet, with momentous implications for U.S. politics and potentially the companys treatment of other world leaders.

A BUDGET UNLIKELY TO FLY Bidens first budget calls for massive boosts to low-income schools, public health programs and fighting climate change, plus a slight Pentagon funding bump that budget reporter Caitlin Emma wrote is unlikely to fly with many in Congress. Nightlys Myah Ward chatted with Caitlin over Slack today about where the process goes next.

I almost hate to ask, but: Why should we care about Bidens budget?

Im the first person to roll my eyes when someone says that an administrations budget is a statement of values or a presidential wish list, but thats essentially what it is. The budget request serves as a marker for where the president wants to make major investments or funding cuts. Congress can then take that under advisement and start crafting annual spending bills.

I think its fairly meaningful considering that its President Bidens first budget proposal, which maybe gives it a little more weight. Democrats also have slim majorities in both chambers of Congress, so there will be added pressure from the administration for lawmakers to deliver on at least some of the presidents priorities. Any government funding deal will ultimately need at least some Senate GOP support, however.

That being said, this is a pretty bare bones request, which the administration has blamed on transition delays. It only covers discretionary spending, which is about a third of the federal budget. A much fuller budget release is forthcoming and its expected to detail Bidens vision for mandatory spending and tax reform.

Any idea when we may see that fuller budget release?

The administration has said later this spring, and I think a lot of folks are anticipating sometime in May, but well see. It should incorporate Bidens infrastructure and jobs plan, as well.

What are your top takeaways from todays release?

Not to get too wonky, but the coming fiscal year (fiscal 2022, which starts Oct. 1) is the first time in a decade that Congress doesnt have to adhere to strict budget limits for defense and non-defense programs. So the Biden administration is proposing big funding increases for public health, efforts to combat climate change, education, etc.

Again, any government funding deal will ultimately require compromise between Democrats and Republicans, but this request for the White House is all about major investments in domestic programs.

We love wonky! What would you say are the most controversial elements of Bidens budget?

Military funding is going to be tough. Biden is calling for a total of $753 billion for national defense programs just a 1.7 percent increase over the previous year. Thats not going to work for Senate Republicans, who dont want to flat-fund the military, and its going to anger more progressive Democrats, who would be fine with whacking 10 percent off the top of the Pentagons budget. How the White House and Congress manage to thread the needle there remains to be seen.

Where does the process go next?

Obviously were waiting on a fuller budget release, but this gives lawmakers enough information to kick off the budget and appropriations process. Cabinet secretaries will start trekking to the Hill to defend the administrations request. Democrats will look to write a fiscal 2022 budget resolution (which they can use to unlock another round of budget reconciliation, by the way thats a whole other can of worms) and appropriators will get started on spending bills.

Government funding runs out on Sept. 30, so by then, we could be looking at a bipartisan funding agreement, or a continuing resolution or a shutdown. But it will probably be an eventful six months!

Amazon workers reject union drive: Workers at an Amazon warehouse in Alabama voted overwhelmingly against unionizing as the final ballots were counted today, marking the defeat of a high-profile drive to establish the first union at the e-commerce giant.

Pentagon orders new screening procedures to weed out extremists: Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin ordered a series of immediate actions to address the threat of extremism in the military, including a review of the armed forces definition of extremist behavior, standardizing questionnaires to screen recruits and developing procedures for veterans to report extremist activities after they leave service.

Psaki: Biden wont pressure Breyer to retire: White House press secretary Jen Psakis remarks today break with liberal activists hoping to ensure Biden and the Democrats Senate majority get the opportunity to install Breyers replacement. He believes thats a decision Justice Breyer will make when he decides its time to no longer serve on the Supreme Court, Psaki said.

Kentucky limits no-knock warrants: Gov. Andy Beshear signed a partial ban on no-knock warrants after months of demonstrations set off by the fatal shooting of Breonna Taylor in her home during a botched police raid last year.

Bidens border czar to depart: Roberta Jacobson, a former ambassador to Mexico who had recently visited the country, will depart at the end of April. The White House said Jacobson had always expected to leave after Bidens first 100 days. But some immigration advocates who work with the White House were taken by surprise by the announcement this afternoon.

Nightly asked you: As people begin to plan travel for the spring and summer, tell us what podcasts we should listen to when we finally hit the road. Your select, lightly edited responses are below:

All Fantasy Everything is the only podcast I listen to the minute it comes out. Comedians Ian Karmel, David George, Sean S. Jordan and a guest gather to draft things from pop culture and the world. Not only is it hilarious but it's generally uplifting and positive. Robert Godinez, teacher, Monterey Park, Calif.

Alan Aldas Clear and Vivid. Its wonderfully informative as well as entertaining. Diane VanderHorn, retired, Freehold, N.J.

Audacity of Trivia. Two PhDs mocking academia and demonstrating their intellectual chops through a trip that is half current events trivia (some of it arcane) and half punditry. Not well known yet, but should be. Jon Ross, nonprofit writer, Chicago

Strong Songs with Kirk Hamilton. He explains all aspects of a popular song. Like Stairway to Heaven. Interesting and soothing. Jeanell Spearman, retired, Huntsville, Texas

This or Something Better a podcast dedicated to the stories of innovators and positive changemakers committed to making the world a better place. Katie McBreen, communications and strategy, Washington, D.C.

Hacks on Tap is wonderfully insightful and fun to listen to. Mike Murphy, David Axelrod, Robert Gibbs and their guests do a great job explaining the political side of governing with skill, insight and a nod toward political history that can only come with years of experience. I teach government to high school students, and their podcast helps make me a better teacher. Chris Wilbur, teacher, Elmhurst, Ill.

MOB RULE? The Italian mafia is diverting vaccines away from those who need them the most, lawmakers fear.

With Italy struggling to get its faltering vaccination campaign on track, the parliaments anti-mafia commission is investigating whether crime syndicates are redirecting vaccines to their friends at the expense of the elderly and vulnerable, particularly in the south where they often exert control over health authorities, Hannah Roberts writes.

The continuing increase in Covid-19 deaths in Italy, as the rate has slowed dramatically in neighboring countries, has led some, including Prime Minister Mario Draghi, to blame younger people for jumping the queue to get vaccinated.

At a press conference on Thursday night, Draghi said: With what conscience does someone jump the queue, knowing that it leaves another person vulnerable, who is more than 65 years old or is fragile, and who has a concrete risk of death?

MORE LIKE OUTFRASTRUCTURE Theres plenty of political cartoons and satire from the week that was in the latest edition of Matt Wuerkers Weekend Wrap, including on the Republican fight against woke capitalism, Bidens infrastructure plan and the debate over gun rights.

HOW PRINCE PHILIP SAVED THE MONARCHY Prince Philip, the longest serving consort in British history, died today at age 99. Otto English reflected on Philips life and how his outsider persona changed the institution of the British monarchy for POLITICO Magazine. He writes:

The central characters in the House of Windsor soap opera are rarely as interesting as the people who marry in.

The core family members, born to privilege, are conditioned and raised to be dull. Its the incoming husbands and wives who are relied upon to bring color. And long before Meghan or Diana were the stars of The Firm, it was Prince Philip who livened things up.

As he advanced into great age, Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, was sometimes seen as a sort of elaborate joke. He was the bigoted family uncle who couldnt be trusted in company. Famed for his gaffes, he evermore resembled the kind of character Sacha Baron Cohen might dream up, an exaggerated version of what a xenophobic member of the English aristocracy might be.

It belied the truth of a far more complex individual: a refugee Greek-Danish prince with a backstory that could have been penned by Hollywood, and also a reformer who tried to drag the royal family into the 20th century.

As the news of Philips death resonates, many Britons may perhaps find themselves surprised at their sense of loss. Few of us can remember a time without him. He has been there like the BBC and the gray skies for all of our lives, one of lifes constants.

A message from UnitedHealth Group:

United Health Foundations Diverse Scholars Initiative is building a 21st century health workforce that ensures all communities have access to high-quality care.

Were proud to have supported nearly 3,000 scholars who will become part of the health workforce and increase access to care, address health disparities and improve health outcomes.

Learn more.

Did someone forward this email to you? Sign up here.

See the original post:

Washington's word of the week, defined - POLITICO - Politico

According to the latest U-Haul migration report, Americans are picking up their roots and moving to Tennessee in droves. They are voting with their feet for the economic opportunity that the Volunteer State has to offer.

We should celebrate the factors that have made our state attractive, but we cannot just sit on our laurels. We must find new ways to better serve the residents of our state and, thereby, continue to attract new growth opportunities.

What makes Tennessee an attractive state for residency? While Tennessee has plenty of geographical, recreational and cultural attractions, the factors largely driving the migration to the state are land-use regulations, economic freedom and sound fiscal policy.

The availability and affordability of housing in Tennessee is another factor driving migration to our state. Housing is affordable in Tennessee, as compared with places such as California or New York, which are dealing with skyrocketing real estate prices, because Tennessee puts relatively few restrictions on residential and commercial building.

Economic freedom also makes Tennessee an attractive place to invest and conduct business without unnecessary interference. Tennessee is one of the most economically free states in our nation due to its healthy size of government compared with the private sector, reasonable regulation and fair taxes.

Finally, migration to Tennessee also is driven by our sound fiscal policy. People on the move are fleeing states with unmanageable debt and mounting unfunded liabilities, as these portend reduced government services or higher taxes in the future.

There are clearly lots of features to brag about in Tennessee. So, where can Tennessee improve? Occupational licensing continues to be a drag on occupational mobility within our state; it also tends to discourage migration to Tennessee. One of the most significant areas in need of reform, however, is personal freedom. Tennessee ranks 45th among the states on that metric. Improving personal freedoms in Tennessee would entail expanding school choice and eliminating our infamously unjust civil asset forfeiture laws. It also would mean reducing our unreasonably high taxes on beer, liquor and wine.

Federalist competition between states and the improvement of regulatory policies are a driving force behind the immense economic success of the U.S. As people continue to flee states with heavy taxation and unaddressed fiscal problems, such as New Jersey, Illinois and California, Tennessee stands to gain. Ultimately, states experiencing a steady loss of taxpaying citizens will be forced to embrace public policies to retain their remaining residents. The states that best protect and advance economic opportunity will ensure their residents enjoy the highest possible quality of life and will continue to attract new businesses and workers.

Lets continue to keep Tennessee an in-bound destination. We can do that by maintaining our high degree of economic freedom and our fiscal discipline, but we also can continue to improve by expanding personal freedom here in Tennessee.

Dr. Daniel J. Smith is the director of the Political Economy Research Institute at Middle Tennessee State University and an associate professor of economics in the Jones College of Business. He also is the senior fellow for fiscal and regulatory policy at the Beacon Center of Tennessee.

Read this article:

Op-Ed: Tennessee on the up and up - The Center Square

NewsOpinionColumnistsThe cash in your pocket is not worth what you may think it is, according to the Austrian School of economics thinkers.

Wednesday, 31st March 2021, 7:00 am

For these esteemed economic gurus Fiat currency or Pounds, Dollars and Yen are being devalued over decades by inflation and poor monetary and fiscal policy. Global macroeconomics works for a select few, but for the ordinary man and woman in the street, it has been a disaster as the pound in their pockets is worth less today than it was in 1971. This being the year that America came off the Gold Standard and in effect devaluated currency across the globe over time.

But, there is far more pressing argument for Scotland as we head into the Independence war with England. The man who has fired the first shots on this debate is the Ex First minister Alex Salmond and now big cheese at the newly formed Alba Party. Like him or loathe him, Salmond knows how to steer the narrative away from him, but at the same time have it focused firmly on him. And this time, he is raising the spectre on a currency for Scotland. A ghost that has spooked the SNP in all its attempts to win freedom from the United Kingdom. Lets explore.

Sign up to our Opinion newsletter

Sign up to our Opinion newsletter

First, we had the oil premium. Yes, with all that oil we should be a rich nation. Wrong! Scotland, like Venezuela, is probably one of the only countries in the world to discover vast deposits of black gold off its shores and end up skint. And we cant blame Margaret Thatcher or any subsequent Westminster governments. We have had plenty time to get our act together and demand a bigger slice of the oil premium. Then to go on and create a sovereign wealth fund. But, nope, even under Salmond, this never took seed.

Then there was the wish-washy lets keep the pound malarkey at the last independence referendum. I recall watching endless TV debates, where this was muted as workable. Alas, the majority of Scots did not think so. It will no doubt raise its head again. But, while oil and the pound have not been convincing arguments for a solid Scottish currency, perhaps there is a way forward out of this stalemate and middle ground. It is called Bitcoin.

If we work from the the premise that Scotland is skint and its borrowing costs will rocket should the good citizens of Scotland tick the Yes" box in sufficient numbers, then there may be a way to get a quick, but sustained win. And perhaps Mr Salmond is onto something here.. But he just doesnt know it yet, because the economic advisor feeding him his lines has not thought it through completely. But, that said, this advisor is onto something.

Borrowing rates globally are almost at negative. Scotland could borrow billions at these rates, locking in big slugs of cash that we can then use. But, rather than feed the cash down the usuals political sinkholes, Scotland could then buy a ton of Bitcoin. Hear me out.

Singapore is pretty clever right? They have a sovereign wealth fund worth hundreds of billions of pounds. And now they are investing in Bitcoin as they have done their arithmetic and due diligence. Sovereign wealth funds dont rush into things lightly. So, maybe Scotland could borrow at minuscule rates and invest in this appreciating asset too. Thus, being an early adopter in the nation state acquisition of Bitcoin, while taking its lead from Singapore.

Ill let that sink it.

What it is, is a contrarian, but potentially smart way of not doing the same old same old issuing bonds and creating long term debt. I would argue that there is a sound monetary policy rationale within this approach. Perhaps even entrepreneurial.

And perish the thought that Scotland would want to be just that -post independence - eh?

Jim Duffy, Create Special

Read this article:

Independent Scotland should invest in Bitcoin - Jim Duffy - The Scotsman