Category Archives: Fiscal Freedom

The decision the Joint Chiefs reach in the next year will be as seminal for the future development of military space as any except the actual creation of Space Force.

We are approaching a watershed moment in the future of the U.S. Space Force. Will all space systems be consolidated into the new service, or will the other services retain some capabilities and personnel? The 2021 National Defense Authorization Act requires the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the service chiefs to report on the space-related missions and expertise that should remain within each service. The decision that the Joint Chiefs reach in the next year will be as seminal for the future development of military space as any except the actual creation of Space Force.

Space Policy Directive-4, which directed the establishment of the USSF, also directed the consolidation of existing forces and authorities for military space activities, as appropriate, in order to minimize duplication of effort and eliminate bureaucratic inefficiencies. The as appropriate caveat was inserted because the National Space Council recognized that some space functions might have to remain in the other services. While an understanding has largely been reached that the other services should no longer develop or operate satellites, no similar consensus has been reached on other space capabilities or supporting space personnel, particularly the future of the space control mission.

Space control is an umbrella term for a broad set of warfighting capabilities that are not unique to a single service. It is broadly defined in Joint Publication 3-14 as operations to ensure freedom of action for the United States and its allies in space and deny an adversary freedom of action in space. Specifically, space control operations include both offensive and defensive capabilities that create effects in the space domain to support military activities in all domains.

While Space Force should be solely responsible for developing capabilities and systems that operate in space, it should not be the only service responsible for developing systems that create effects in space. As it develops into a mature warfighting domain, the other services will find it necessary to continue to build and integrate space control systems capable of protecting and enabling forces in their respective domains.

The space control missions that should be retained by the other services are most analogous to the air defense mission of the Army. While the Army does not operate aircraft for the purposes of protecting land forces from air attack, it has always retained various air defense systems designed to defend land forces from air threats. Absent its air arm, the Navy also conducts the air defense mission from surface vessels in a manner that another service could not replicate. In the same way that these services have integrated the air defense mission, the space control mission set will still need to be fully integrated into domain-specific platforms and will not be unique to any single service. In sum, while the other services will not operate systems in the space domain, they should not be excluded from creating effects in it.

Unlike the air defense analogy, the space control capabilities that the services need to retain will not be purely defensive. Defensive space control, as currently defined in JP-3-14, is limited to active and passive measures taken to protect friendly space capabilities from attack, interference, or unintentional hazards. It does not account for defensive space control actions that may be necessary to protect forces in other domains from adversary space capabilities. The space control capabilities the services need for protection will also have an inherently dual-use nature that will enable multi-domain operations which Space Command will integrate.

The joint integration of space warfighting within Space Command is another reason to retain some joint space control acquisition authorities. In addition to directing the creation of the Space Force, SPD-4 also directed the establishment of U.S. Space Command, noting that the command would perform its mission with forces provided by the United States Space Force and other United States Armed Forces. The space capabilities and personnel that the services retain will be the space forces that they will provide to Space Command. If the other services lack any organic space capabilities to present, they would only be nominally represented within Space Command. This lack of joint forces and expertise would create a disconnect between domains, generating the very inter-service issues that the Goldwater-Nichols Act was meant to resolve.

A counterargument to service retention of space control capabilities is that the consolidation of all things space within one service will lead to streamlined acquisition timelines and reduced cost. This is most likely true for the development of satellites and other in-space systems. But it is almost certainly not true when it comes to engineering space capabilities for the unique needs of each service at the user level. Today it is unrealistic to expect the Space Force to budget funds to develop satellite communications terminals designed specifically for the maritime environment. It is just as unrealistic to expect the Space Force to meet all of the Navys future sea-based space control needs. There will simply be too many demands on the Space Force budget to expect it to adequately fund all aspects of the space enterprise. Allowing the services to retain space control capabilities will ensure that they can allocate funds proportionate to the threat as they see it from their domain. This spreading of fiscal responsibility will create a healthier Department of Defense wide response to future space threats.

Retaining the space control mission within the other services will necessarily limit the number of space personnel available for transfer to the Space Force. A recent survey of Army Space officers demonstrated that enthusiasm for transfer is high, and if permitted, nearly all of them would transfer. The Army and the Navy will be reluctant to allow their space personnel to transfer en masse to Space Force if they still have a mission within their parent service. Limiting transfers will reduce the positive cultural impact that the mass transfer of non-Air Force space personnel would have on the culture of the new service. Without this infusion of new perspectives, Space Force will find the already difficult task of making a cultural break with the Air Force even more challenging. However, the presence of these skilled and experienced service retained space personnel at Space Command will be a mitigating factor. They will help ensure that a uniquely joint space warfighting culture develops at the combatant command level, where space forces are actually employed. On balance, the loss of the cultural impact that these personnel transfers would have on Space Force is less than the loss that their transfer would have on the integration of joint space warfighting within Space Command in the future.

Space control from within the space domain is a uniquely Space Force mission, but space control from other warfighting domains is not. As the space domain continues to evolve into an active warfighting domain with tactical, operational, and strategic implications across all domains, each service needs to retain the ability to create effects in space from their respective domains to protect their forces and enable multi-domain operations. These future space control capabilities will need to be fully integrated into land, sea, and air platforms and forces in a manner that the USSF will not be able to achieve. The task of fully integrating necessary space control capabilities into their forces is therefore best achieved by the services.

Lt. Col. Brad Townsend, Ph.D., PE, is an Army Space Operations Officer currently assigned to the Joint Staff J-5 Space Policy. The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government.

This article originally appeared in the Dec. 14, 2020 issue of SpaceNews magazine.

Go here to see the original:

Op-ed | Not all space capabilities should reside in Space Force - SpaceNews

2020 has been one for the record books for Apple Valley and its neighbors.

The year began with some of the typical annual activities like Mid-Winter Fest and the Frozen Apple Concert series along with the anticipation of others to come, like Freedom Days over the July 4 holiday.

But with the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in March, Freedom Days, summer concerts and more never happened. Public buildings, schools, some businesses and public city pools closed. Some reopened with restrictions and closed again later. People have been encouraged to social distance, wear face coverings and take other precautions.

In the midst of the pandemic, stories of community members, businesses and others helping each other have emerged. Organizers got creative and changed the format of their events from in-person to virtual or scaled back on in-person activities. The city of Apple Valley grappled with how to use just over $4 million in federal coronavirus relief dollars for COVID-19-related expenses.

The community also experienced the sudden death of a parks and recreation leader, financial uncertainty for the Minnesota Zoo, social unrest related to the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis and two fatal shooting incidents.

Heres a recap of some of the news from the year.

COVID-19 response in Apple Valley

The pandemic affected all facets of government and peoples everyday lives. The city of Apple Valley, like many other governmental entities, moved from in-person meetings to holding public meetings virtually from March to June. Since the Municipal Center reopened during the summer, the city has held in-person meetings with the option for the public to comment virtually.

Apple Valley High School sophomore Sydney Hooppaw loads food into the back of a car during a May 4 food distribution hosted by The Open Door and Minnesota Valley Transit Authority at the Apple Valley Transit Station.

The City Council took other actions in an attempt to bring some relief to residents and businesses including waiving utility late fees, approving temporary beer and wine takeout sales and approving temporary outdoor service areas. The council also allocated $400,000 of the federal relief funding for a business relief grant program to help certain businesses with COVID-19 expenses.

The City Council and the Freedom Days committee decided to cancel the event because of COVID-19 concerns. The council also voted to close the Apple Valley Aquatic Center and Redwood Pool for the season.

The Apple Valley American Legion canceled its usual Memorial Day ceremony with members of the posts Color Guard/Honor Guard conducting honors for Memorial Day with a small, nonpublic ceremony. The Apple Valley Arts Foundation canceled its annual Music in Kelley Park concerts. One of the singers originally scheduled to perform later offered a virtual concert.

The city made several changes for the primary and general elections in 2020 due to COVID-19, including city officials responding to an influx of absentee ballots being cast. City Clerk Pam Gackstetter said over 50 percent of Apple Valleys registered voters requested an absentee ballot for the general election. Training for election judges was done virtually. The city implemented several safety measures including having judges wear masks and other protective equipment, erecting sneeze guard shields between voters and judges, using disposable secrecy sleeves and regularly sanitizing equipment.

Multiple local restaurants offered free meals to community members after schools were ordered to close in March because of the pandemic. The Free Book Buggie, a local nonprofit, worked with some of those restaurants to offer free books to residents during the free meal times.

Other examples of people helping each other include the property manager at the Legends of Apple Valley apartment complex starting a food pantry for its senior residents; an Apple Valley family putting up a Christmas lights display in their yard in April to offer residents free, distanced entertainment; and the Open Door Pantry partnering with the Minnesota Valley Transit Authority and local schools to offer food distribution events to the broader community. There was also a birthday parade for a 12-year-old boy who collected food and cleaning products to help the community and a surprise car cruise to lift a terminally ill veterans spirits.

Minnesota Zoo affected by pandemic

The finances of the Apple Valley attraction have been affected by the pandemic. The zoo, a state agency, temporarily closed to the public from March 14 to July 19 in response to COVID-19. Even after it reopened the zoo operated at reduced capacity, offering a socially distant experience for visitors. It has been closed for a second time since Nov. 21.

The closures have led to the zoos revenue taking a hit. The zoo took several cost-cutting measures including a hiring freeze, staff reductions and delaying or canceling major projects.

The zoo receives one-third of its operating budget from state appropriations and the rest is generated through earned revenue and contributions.

Zoo officials told the newspaper in November the zoo earned $2.2 million in the first quarter of fiscal year 2020-21 (July to September), which is about 57% less than it earned in the same period last year. The zoos budget projected earned revenue of $18.3 million for the fiscal 2020-21 biennium compared to the pre-COVID estimate of $33.4 million. Based on this, the zoos outlook was about the same as it was over the summer: a $15 million revenue loss as anticipated at the start of the pandemic. On average, the zoos yearly general operating budget is approximately $28 million.

The zoo has received financial support through a $6 million appropriation from the state and a new drive-thru fundraiser called Beastly Boulevard. Other annual events that support the zoo including Beastly Bash and the Tiger Tracks 5K Walk, Run, and Roll were held virtually this year. A second new drive-thru fundraiser, Nature Illuminated, started Dec. 3 and runs through Jan. 17.

The zoo is continuing to move forward with some of its planned capital improvements. The bonding bill passed by the Legislature this year includes $13 million for the zoo, of which $11 million is allocated for the new Treetop Trail project and $2 million for asset preservation.

Zoo spokesman Zach Nugent has said the zoo anticipates a long-term recovery period and will continue to evaluate its ability to build back and redevelop staffing and programming opportunities. As a state agency its part of a statewide hiring freeze.

Changes in city leadership

Apple Valley Parks and Recreation Director Barry Bernstein died suddenly March 21. Bernstein had worked for the city since 2012.

Superintendent Mike Endres has been working as acting interim parks and recreation director since late March. Endres indicated his desire in August to return to his previous position by the end of the year.

The council hired Huelife to help with the search for a new parks and recreation director. After interviewing five finalist candidates in November, the City Council formally approved the hiring of Eric Carlson on Dec. 10. Carlson has been Inver Grove Heights parks and recreation director for over 13 years and will start his position in Apple Valley on Jan. 19.

The City Council will see a change in early 2021 as Apple Valley Mayor Mary Hamann-Roland resigns her position to take her new seat on the Dakota County Board of Commissioners. Hamann-Roland defeated incumbent Chris Gerlach for the seat during the general election.

The council is scheduled to discuss the process of filling Hamann-Rolands position during the Jan. 14 meeting.

Seven people filed to run for two City Council seats during the general election. Incumbents Ruth Grendahl and Tom Goodwin were reelected for another term. Grendahl has been on the council since 1997 and Goodwin has served since 1987.

Two apparent murder-suicide incidents occurred in the city.

On Feb. 22, police say Alexander Petrovich fatally shot his younger brother and mother before taking his own life. Alexander reportedly suffered from untreated health symptoms for most of his adult life.

Officers responded to the home owned by Janice Petrovich at 13640 Upper Elkwood Court at 12:18 p.m. Feb. 22, after a 911 caller found three people who had been shot inside the home.

Police found the bodies of two men and one woman, who were later identified by the Hennepin County Medical Examiner as Janice Petrovich, 60, and her sons, Alexander Petrovich, 27, and Jonathan Petrovich, 23. The manner of death was listed as homicide for Janice and Jonathan, and suicide for Alexander. The Police Department said it believes Alexanders mental health challenges likely contributed to the violence in the home.

According to the department, Janice, Alexander and Jonathan all lived at the home. Officers responded to the house for different calls but nothing involving violence. According to court records, Jonathan had a history of mental illness but similar records cannot be found for Alexander. Alexander had previous criminal convictions for dogs at large and fourth-degree criminal damage to property in Dakota County, as well as minor traffic infractions, court records show.

On Nov. 4, Raymond Ronald Rosenbaum, 51, was suspected by police of shooting two people before taking his own life. Rosenbaum died of a gunshot wound to the head on Nov. 4. Police believe Rosenbaum used a .40-caliber handgun to shoot 52-year-old Faye Elizabeth Brown, who died of a gunshot wound to the torso on Nov. 4 and a 56-year-old man who survived and was hospitalized. The three of them all lived at the Morningview condominium complex at 7600 157th Street W.

Apple Valley Police Capt. Nick Francis said while Brown called police multiple times in 2020 reporting that Rosenbaum was harassing her, Rosenbaum never committed any crimes.

Court records indicate Rosenbaum has no criminal history in Minnesota other than convictions for petty misdemeanor seatbelt and texting while driving violations in 2017 in Dakota County. Francis said the departments coordinated response team, which includes an officer and a mental health professional, reached out to Rosenbaum prior to the Nov. 4 incident but he did not accept any services.

Unrest filters into Dakota County

The violence, break-ins and looting from the riots in Minneapolis and St. Paul filtered into some parts of Dakota County following the death of George Floyd while in Minneapolis police custody on May 25.

The first three nights of protest in the Twin Cities left burned-out buildings, smashed-out windows and stores robbed.

The evening of May 28, West St. Paul police reported that 18 businesses were damaged and items stolen during quick strikes, and two men allegedly smashed windows to break into the Dakota Countys Western Service Center in Apple Valley in the early morning hours of May 29. Fire and significant water damage was done to the judges chambers and court areas.

Arrests were made in connection to both incidents, including charges in U.S. District Court against the Apple Valley suspects.

Fornandous Cortez Henderson was sentenced on Dec. 9 to six and a half years in prison for aiding and abetting arson in connection to the arson at the Western Service Center. He entered a guilty plea on Aug. 26 in U.S. District Court in St. Paul. Hendersons sentence also includes a three-year supervised release and an order to pay $205,873 in restitution.

According to Hendersons guilty plea and documents filed with the court, Henderson and Garrett Patrick Ziegler, co-defendant, constructed multiple Molotov cocktails, and in the early morning hours of May 29 broke multiple windows at the Western Service Center with baseball bats and threw in multiple, lit Molotov cocktails.

Some of these devices successfully ignited and caused the fire damage.

Henderson and Ziegler also attempted to start other fires at the Western Service Center by pouring ignitable liquids and throwing unlit Molotov cocktails in and around the broken windows, then attempting to start the fluids on fire.

The attack caused hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage, according to a U.S. Attorneys Office. The Western Service Center houses state and local agencies and organizations, including Dakota County court facilities, as well as a U.S. Passport center.

Other incidents linked to the rioting were reported in Burnsville, Eagan, Inver Grove Heights and Mendota Heights, including some burglary and firearms charges.

A peaceful protest also took place on Cahill Road in Inver Grove Heights. Dakota County Sheriff Tim Leslie said an 8 p.m. to 6 a.m. curfew that was implemented May 29 through June 1 in Dakota County was effective in quelling potential lawlessness.

Read the original post:

Year in Review: A year for the record books in Apple Valley - ECM Publishers

When the UK entered the coronavirus age in March, state resources and collective commitment were mobilised on a scale not seen since the second world war. Decades ago, Britain had revealed itself, thanks in part to being able to marshal the industrial might of the empire, to be a formidable world power. Its economy was energised with breakthroughs in radar, atomic power and medicine.

Although the story of the pandemic has not yet ended, there appears to be no such transformation in sight under Boris Johnson. Rather depressingly, familiar trends of greed, incompetence and cronyism are reasserting themselves. This is bad news for an economy where there has been a collapse of socially useful innovation. Britains lack of hi-tech manufacturing capabilities, notably in medical diagnostic testing, was cruelly exposed by the pandemic.

This country has become more of a procurer than a producer of technology. But it is a remarkably inefficient one despite an extraordinarily high percentage of lawyers and accountants in the working population. Connections seem to matter more than inventions. How else to explain why, in the desperate scramble to procure personal protective equipment, ventilators and coronavirus tests, billions of pounds of contracts have gone to companies either run by friends or supporters even neighbours of Conservative politicians, or with no prior expertise.

History is not short of examples where political insiders were successful in extracting virtually all the surplus that the economy created. Such influential interests moulded politics to enlarge their share of the pie. Greed was limited only by the need to let the producers survive. The shock of war, revolution, famine or plague provides an opportunity to fix a broken society. But if, post-pandemic, UK politicians care less about reform than the retention of power, they will fail to restrain the grasping enrichment that undermines democracy itself.

Perhaps the most penetrating X-ray of this phenomenon today is by Brett Christophers in his book Rentier Capitalism. The academic makes the case that Britain has become a treasure island for those seeking excess profits from state-sanctioned control of natural resources, property, financial assets and intellectual property. Rent, paid by renters to rentiers, is tied to the ownership or control of such assets, made scarce under conditions of limited or no competition.

Mr Christophers says that the first sign of this new order was when Britain struck black gold in the North Sea. He writes that MPs on the public accounts committee noted with incredulity in 1972 that the first huge areas of the sea were leased to the companies as generously as though Britain were a gullible Sheikhdom. After that, public assets were sold off cheaply. The private sector ended up controlling lightly regulated monopolies in gas, water and electric supply, and public transport and telecoms. Customers lost out, overpaying for poor service. In a rentiers paradise, windfall profits abound. Brazenly occupying the lowest moral ground was essential, as the housebuilder Persimmon proved by earning supersized state-backed help-to-buy profits long enough to hand out a 75m bonus to its boss.

The banks, which took this country to the brink of collapse a decade ago, are at the heart of a rentier state. France, Germany, Japan, the US all have banking sectors smaller than the UK. While banks earning rents have flourished, the households paying them either directly as financial consumers, or indirectly as taxpayers of a debtor state or customers of debtor firms have floundered.

The anger that such spivvery engenders is diffused politically by making voters complicit in the theft. The sell-off of council homes, says Mr Christophers, was a privatisation that gave many of those perhaps most inclined to kick against Thatcherism a personal stake in the project. Culturally, Brexit plays the same sort of role as the right to buy, insulating poorer leave voters from the idea that they will suffer from the resulting policies.

The prime minister understands that Covid can change Britain, but lacks modernising policies. He extols the virtues of free competition both for itself and because such freedom, he reasons, will somehow liberate the spirit fluttering within a pre-Brexit Britain caged by coronavirus. He is no doubt betting that the disruption of leaving the EU will be lost in the roar of an economy taking off as an inoculated population returns to offices and shops.

The gap between rich and poor in the UK is at least as high today, academics calculate, as it was just before the start of the second world war. This is largely because the British state that once mediated the struggle between labour and capital has been taken over by rentiers. Weakening regulations, reducing the importance of fiscal policy and shredding social protections has corroded liberal democracy in which an increasingly influential wealthy few have been enjoying a free run. Ultimately, rentiers want to increase what the economist Micha Kalecki called the degree of monopoly in an economy. This allows them to limit the ability of workers, consumers and regulators to influence the markup of selling prices over costs and to defend the share of wages in output.

The EU says its labour, environment and customer protections are a floor, not a ceiling, and that they cant be traded away for frictionless market access. If we had stayed in the club, our ability to concentrate profits for monopolists would have been stymied in future trade deals negotiated by Brussels and open to MEPs scrutiny. Outside the EU, Mr Johnson can barter away such regulations without parliamentary oversight and scrap safeguards in new technology for higher monopoly profits. Karl Marx wrote in The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte in 1852 that the Tories in England long fancied that they were in raptures about royalty, the church and the beauties of the ancient constitution, until a time of trial tore from them the confession that they were only in raptures about rent. His assessment of early 19th-century Tories applies with unerring accuracy to todays Conservatives.

Mr Christophers insight is that the Tories under Mr Johnson are a party of and for rentiers, much more than the interests of productive capital. This explains why, after 2016, the Tory party embraced Brexit and shrugged off productive capitals concerns about leaving the EU. It will be to the great detriment of this country if the pandemic permitted Mr Johnson to combine present-day fears with a yearning for hopeful change to persuade the average person to vote against their interests in the future. But history often repeats itself first as tragedy, then as farce.

Read the rest here:

The Guardian view on Britain out of the EU: a treasure island for rentiers - The Guardian

Three years ago this month, 26 people at a church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, were shot to death as they gathered for Sunday services. Less than a year later, a gunman shouting Jews must die entered Pittsburghs Tree of Life synagogue on the Jewish Sabbath, killing 11 worshippers. In 2012, a shooting at a suburban Wisconsin Sikh temple left seven dead. This month, the leader of an anti-government group went on trial for bombing a mosque in suburban Minneapolis.

From small towns to major cities across the United States, perpetrators have carried out at least 14 attacks on houses of worship across the United States in the last five years, killing more than 60 people.

A report issuedlast week by the Federal Bureau of Investigation demonstrates that such attacks are on the rise, and that no faith community is immune.

The FBIs 2019 Hate Crimes Statistics Report documented 1,521 incidents of anti-religious hate crimes; of those, 62 percent targeted American Jews; almost 13 percent were perpetrated against those identifying as Christians; 12 percent were committed against Muslims; and almost four percent were anti-Sikh or Hindu. Overall, the number of religious-bias incidents rose from 1,419 in 2018 to 1,521 in 2019 a seven percent increase. And because hate-crime reporting isnt mandatory, the number of religiously biased attacks is surely greater than the report shows.

Religious leaders of all stripes are rightly alarmed by these trends. While the unfortunate history in the Jewish community has long made security a significant concern, other faith communities that once believed their congregations were immune to such terror have begun to take greater precautions to protect their flocks. Indeed, growing numbers of churches and synagogues conduct active-shooter drills and security trainings and have created volunteer security teams.

But even as preparedness has grown, the largest obstacle that stands between most houses of worship and increased security is funding. The United States is home to almost 400,000 churches, synagogues and mosques, many of them already struggling to afford basic expenditures such as clergy and utilities. Paying for large-ticket items such as shatterproof windows, force-resistant doors, surveillance systems and protective fencing items that can each easily run into tens of thousands of dollars isnt typically a realistic option. The same is true for hiring security guards another expense many houses of worship hadnt contemplated before attacks began multiplying.

As congressional leaders work to finalize and pass a year-end appropriations package, it is very important that they include in it robust funding to keep all the people in our pews safe. This can be done by dramatically increasing the funding level of the Nonprofit Security Grant Program (NSGP).

Administered by the Department of Homeland Security, the bipartisan legislation that created the NSGP was enacted in the wake of 9/11. The NSGP is the only federal tool of its kind, providing grants of up to $100,000 apiece to synagogues, churches, mosques, parochial day schools and a wide swath of other nonprofits at risk of terror attacks. The monies may be used for security equipment, staff and volunteer training and contracted security personnel.

To date, the program has provided $419 million in grants to thousands of recipients seeking to enhance the security of their buildings. However, Congresss allocations for the program have fluctuated vastly from year to year, and the growing need has outpaced available funding. In fiscal year 2019, for example, there were 2,039 applications submitted requesting a total of $169 million; funding for that year, however, was capped at $60 million. With the increase in attacks, my organization and a broad coalition of interfaith partners have requested increasing the 2020 allocation $90 million to $360 million for 2021.

Several lawmakers, led by Senate Minority Leader Chuck SchumerChuck SchumerProtect America's houses of worship in year-end appropriations package Club for Growth to launch ad blitz in Georgia to juice GOP turnout Inequality of student loan debt underscores possible Biden policy shift MORE (D-N.Y.) and House Appropriations Chairwoman Nita LoweyNita Sue LoweySpending deal clears obstacle in shutdown fight GSA offers to brief Congress next week on presidential transition Biden aide: First Cabinet picks will be announced Tuesday, GSA holdup preventing background checks MORE (D-N.Y.), have expressed support for this essential increase and, earlier this year, the House of Representatives included this funding increase in the DHS appropriations bill it passed.

Every American of every faith has the right to worship as they please. But this freedom to worship is hollow if it is not accompanied by a freedom from fear. As Congress concludes its business this year, it must provide the resources to keep Americas houses of worship and other faith-based nonprofits safe and secure.

Nathan Diament is executive director for public policy for the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America and serves on the Department of Homeland Securitys Subcommittee for the Prevention of Targeted Violence Against Faith-Based Communities.

See more here:

Protect America's houses of worship in year-end appropriations package | TheHill - The Hill

The results of the second European COVID-19 lockdown remain to be seen, but one thing is already clear. While Europe may wonder whether it was right not to follow Asias full pandemic-containment drive, it has no reason to regret having rejected Americas misguided strategy.

PARIS From the moment COVID-19 emerged as a global threat, it was clear that it would test every societys strength, resilience, and response capabilities. Almost one year on, it is time to assess who passed the test, and who failed.

From a public-health standpoint, the answer is clear: East Asia including Australia and New Zealand passed the test with flying colors. As for the rest, Europe performed unevenly, the United States stumbled badly, and developing countries have struggled.

To be sure, luck played more than its part in explaining initially uneven performance. In Europe, Italy and Spain were hit extremely hard by the first wave, because the then-unknown coronavirus took root, unnoticed, until it erupted in full force. By contrast, Germany and Poland saw it coming and could take effective measures in time.

But while governments can ascribe unequal death tolls during the first wave to luck, the argument does not hold for the second wave. Policymakers cannot eschew responsibility for the uncontrolled spread of the pandemic in the US or its resurgence in Europe.

Two trade-offs dominate discussions on the policy response. The first one, between disease control and individual rights, is hard to avoid. Contact tracing and mandatory isolation are effective in combating the spread of the virus, but infringe on civil liberties. China clearly stands apart for its disregard of individual freedom, but Western societies would also find it hard to accept the intrusive tracing measures taken in South Korea or Singapore. Like it or not, there is a price to pay for the freedom and privacy we cherish.

The second trade-off is not between saving lives and saving the economy. Rather, it involves a choice between being stringent today and being forced to be more stringent tomorrow. European societies went for strict lockdown measures in the spring, and then all but ended social distancing over the summer. By October, the only option left was to tighten the screws again. Australia made a different choice and moderately increased the stringency of its disease-containment measures throughout its winter season. It was able to relax these controls just when European countries had to strengthen theirs.

Enjoy unlimited access to the ideas and opinions of the world's leading thinkers, including weekly long reads, book reviews, and interviews; The Year Ahead annual print magazine; the complete PS archive; and more All for less than $9 a month.

Subscribe Now

In a recent commentary, the French economists Philippe Aghion and Patrick Artus lambasted European countries stop-and-go approach and argued that they would have been better off keeping enough containment measures in place throughout the summer. Indeed, despite being much less severe than the first one, the second lockdown is hitting already fragile firms and households, thereby darkening the economic horizon. In hindsight, Europe might have avoided it by keeping gyms and bars closed this summer.

The bottom line is that, whether out of principle or inconsistency, Western societies made their choice, and East Asia made a different one. And for the second time in little more than a decade the other instance being the global financial crisis the West is trapped in a maelstrom while, this time, Asia sails on.

Regarding the economic response, the interesting contrast is the transatlantic one. The US approach under President Donald Trump has been to let companies fire staff (possibly with a rehire promise) but to engineer massive fiscal support through tax cuts and additional unemployment benefits. European states have instead relied on generalized government-financed furlough schemes that preserve employees income and status, while (outside of the United Kingdom at least) providing less outright budget support. As a result, the International Monetary Fund reckons that the 2020 US fiscal deficit will reach a post-war high of 19% of GDP, almost twice the eurozone average.

On the whole, therefore, the US under Trump has deliberately put the economy first, opting for less public-health protection and fewer worker safeguards but more fiscal support. European countries have put public health and social protection first, relying on initially harsh confinement measures and open-ended support to preserve employment relationships, with little additional budgetary stimulus.

The output decline in the spring was inevitably much sharper in Europe than in the US (with the exception of Germany, where the lockdown was less stringent). But the increase in European unemployment was far more limited. Jason Furman of Harvard University estimates that what he calls the realistic US unemployment rate jumped from 3.6% before the crisis to 20% in April. In Europe, by contrast, up to one-quarter of the labor force was furloughed, but only gig and temporary workers, as well as new labor-market entrants, ended up unemployed. For the vast majority, the social safety net worked much better than it did in America.

Remarkably, European output rebounded sharply when governments lifted the lockdowns, despite the relatively less generous fiscal support. Third-quarter GDP in Germany and France was about 95% of pre-crisis levels, exactly like in the US (it was lower in Spain, largely because of the collapse in tourism; data for Italy are not yet available). Any scars these economies might have suffered in the lockdown period did not rob them of their resilience.

Thus far, at least, Europe does not seem to be paying a price for its decision to put health above economics. And the US apparently is not benefiting from its larger fiscal stimulus, because consumers reacted to unprecedented uncertainty by hoarding cash at record rates. Between January and April 2020, the US personal saving rate skyrocketed from 7% to 33%, and it remains well above normal. Money injected into the economy helped the poor, but on the whole, it ended up increasing bank deposits rather than consumption and output.

Admittedly, the jury is still out, awaiting results of the second European lockdown. But amid the fog of the war against the pandemic, one thing is already clear: while Europe may wonder whether it was right not to emulate Australias full pandemic-containment drive, it has no reason to regret having rejected Americas misguided strategy.

Originally posted here:

Grading the Big Pandemic Test by Jean Pisani-Ferry - Project Syndicate

The Swiss government has signed a protocol with the Geneva-based International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), amending the humanitarian organisations headquarters agreement and status in Switzerland.

Keystone-SDA/FDFA/SWI swissinfo.ch/jc

The new provisions are designed to increase the ICRC's independence and capacity for action, according to a government press statement published on Friday. The protocol was signed by Foreign Minister Ignazio Cassis and ICRC President Peter Maurer at an official ceremony in the federal capital Bern.

The Swiss-run ICRC is the federal government's main partner in the field of humanitarian aid and plays a key role in the protection of victims of armed conflict and implementation of the Geneva Conventions, said the government statement.

Established in 1863, the ICRC is at the origin of the Geneva Conventions and the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. It directs and coordinates the international activities conducted by the Movement in armed conflicts and other situations of violence.

This latest protocol amends a 1993 agreement establishing the organisation's legal status in Switzerland. The amendments relate mainly to social security provisions for its staff, and data protection.

As part of its international mandate, the ICRC processes highly sensitive data on the situation in regions of armed conflict and concerning the victims of such conflicts, the statement added. In the interests of victims and their families, under the new provisions the ICRC's documents, archives and communications are better protected in an increasingly digital world.

Foreign minister Cassis welcomed the amendments and reaffirmed the close cooperation between Switzerland and the Geneva-based ICRC, it said.

The 1993 headquarters agreement serves notably to protect the ICRCs independence. The organisation guards its neutrality so as to be able to carry out its humanitarian work on both sides of a conflict.

Under the 1993 agreement, the federal government recognises the ICRC's international juridical personality and legal capacity in Switzerland, and guarantees its independence and freedom of action. It confers on the ICRC the immunities granted to international organizations based in Switzerland, but does not confer any fiscal immunities on ICRC members and staff.

The ICRC has 1,000 employees in Geneva, and 18,800 worldwide. According to a media report in September, the organisation is planning to cut dozens of posts owing to financial pressures linked to the Covid-19 pandemic.

The international organisation is reportedly struggling to meet its annual budget estimated at CHF2.2 billion ($2.4 billion), while the Covid-19 pandemic has increased the need for humanitarian aid, Swiss public radio, RTS said.

In 2019, Switzerland was the fourth largest donor. It provided CHF80 million to cover the ICRC headquarters budget and CHF74 million for its humanitarian operations around the world.

Read the original post:

Switzerland and ICRC update HQ accord to boost 'capacity for action' - swissinfo.ch

San Franciscos City Board of Supervisors voted to advance a bill that would ban smoking inside private dwellings located in an apartment with three or more units. Thebill, filed on November 12, applies to smoking tobacco, vaping, and cannabis products.

The ultimate motivating factor for this legislation lies in the argument that non-smokers in the building have the right to breathe clean air, which they cannot do if their neighbors smoke in their private premises. This bill applies not only to private dwellings in units, but also to private patios and balconies. San Francisco currently bans smoking in common areas of multi-unit complexes as well as all public spaces.

The boards Public Safety and Neighborhood Services Committee voted November 12 to progress the legislation to the next phase, which is a full board vote. This vote is expected to take place on December 1.

The ideals behind this smoking ban are inherently anti-liberty. Individuals are more than capable, and better equipped than lawmakers, to determine what is best for them in their own homes. Furthermore, infringing on ones ability to smoke, particularly in regards to using vaping and e-cigarettes in their own home is dangerous for tobacco cessation efforts.

E-cigarettes have emerged as an effective smoking cessation tool, with a recent study in theNew England Journal of Medicinefinding their use to be twice as effective as nicotine replacement therapy (i.e. gums and lozenges), in helping smokers quit. Since their introduction to the U.S. market in 2007, an estimated three million American adults have used these products to quit combustible cigarettes.

Ultimately, this bill would override Bay Area residents rights in another example of government overregulation.

The Obama administration enacted a national ban on smoking in 2018,which prohibited smoking in and near public housing throughout the country, affecting 1.2 million households in units managed by around 3,300 local agencies. This ban disproportionately affected low-income individuals who tend to live in federally subsidized public housing more than other segments of the population.

Generally, lower-income Americans spend a larger share of their disposable income on cigarettes, vaping, and tobacco products, which means that this indoor smoking ban would also excessively impact impoverished and working-class San Francisco residents.

Furthermore, the bills sponsor, Supervisor Norman Yee, stated that a reason for this ban ties into the coronavirus pandemic. Smoke easily moves between units and buildings. Now that more of us work from home, its more important than ever, Yee said. However, if smokers cannot smoke in their homes or on their patios and balconies, that means more residents will congregate in the streets, which would go against the citys COVID-19 shelter-in-place orders.

According to the bill, residents found violating the ban would first be issued written warnings, but then could potentially face a fine of up to $1,000 for subsequent violations. According tocity estimates,about 12 percent of San Francisco adults smoke cigarettes, about 20 percent of adults have used e-cigarettes, and about 60 percent of adults use cannabis. Meanwhile, about half of the citys residents live in multi-unit buildings that would be subject to the ban.

This ban would punish lower-income individuals and renters who cannot afford to live in single-family or completely private residences. The average rent in San Francisco rings in at approximately $3,5000 per month for a one-bedroom apartment, according toInvestopedia.

Those who have argued against smoking bans in private homes have often contended that the proposed policy violates the fundamental right to engage in a legal activity in a private home. Many also argue it encroaches upon the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Over the years, San Francisco officials in general, and the Board of Supervisors in particular, have intruded upon the rights of smokers bybanning smoking for people standing in lines at ATMs, movie theatres, takeout lines, bus stops, and transit stations. This was extended in 2014 to include vaping products and e-cigarettes. Furthermore, the sale of menthol cigarettes and all flavored tobacco and vaping products werebanned in 2017.

In short, this bill is an outsized infringement on renters rights and Americans fundamental liberties in a time when people are forced to stay in the confines of their own home, particularly in a state such as California, given Gov. Newsoms overzealous lockdown and shelter-in-place orders. The impending fines that would go into effect if this bill were to pass would be another attempt at unreliable sin tax funding for San Franciscos $1.5 billion deficit. The City Board of Supervisors should look to cutting costly city-run programs instead of looking towards flippant attempts at sin taxes that go hand in hand with egregious overregulation.

The following articles provide more information on e-cigarettes and tobacco harm reduction.

Tobacco Harm Reduction 101: A Guidebook for Policymakers

https://www.heartland.org/publications-resources/publications/latest-heartland-policy-booklet-addresses-vaping-myths

This booklet from The Heartland Institute aims to inform key stakeholders on the much-needed information on the benefits of electronic cigarettes and vaping devices. Tobacco Harm Reduction 101details the history of e-cigarettes, including regulatory actions on these products. The booklet also explains the role of nicotine, addresses tax policy, and debunks many of the myths associated with e-cigarettes, including assertions about popcorn lung, formaldehyde, and the so-called youth vaping epidemic.

Cigarette Taxes and Smuggling: A Statistical Analysis and Historical Review

http://heartland.org/policy-documents/cigarette-taxes-and-smuggling-statistical-analysis-and-historical-review

The authors of this study consider cigarette smuggling from two angles. First, they employ a statistical model to estimate the degree to which cigarette smuggling occurs in 47 of the 48 contiguous U.S. states. Second, they review the historical experiences of three statesMichigan, New Jersey, and Californiaknown to have problems with cigarette smuggling. The authors findings suggest state policymakers should reassess the value of cigarette taxes as revenue and public health tool.

10 Principles of State Fiscal Policy

http://heartland.org/policy-documents/ten-principles-state-fiscal-policy

This Heartland Institute booklet provides policymakers and civic and business leaders with a highly condensed yet easy-to-read guide to state fiscal policy matters. It presents the 10 most important principles of sound fiscal policy, from Above all else: Keep taxes low to Protect state employees from politics.

The Case Against Smoking Bans

http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv29n4/v29n4-4.pdf

Thomas A. Lambert, an associate professor at the University of Missouri-Columbia School of Law, argues the market is the best place to make decisions on smoking. He writes, a laissez-faire approach better accommodates heterogeneous preferences regarding public smoking.

Smoking Bans Cloud Free Markets Ability to Thrive

http://www.bipps.org/pubs/SmokingBan.pdf

The Bluegrass Institute for Public Policy Solutions takes a comprehensive look at smoking bans and concludes the best way to promote a win-win smoking policy is to inform and educate rather than legislate and regulate.

_____

Nothing in this Research & Commentary is intended to influence the passage of legislation, and it does not necessarily represent the views of The Heartland Institute. For further information on this and other topics, visit theBudget & Tax Newswebsite,The Heartland Institutes website, ourConsumer Freedom Lounge,andPolicyBot, Heartlands free online research database.

The Heartland Institute can send an expert to your state to testify or brief your caucus; host an event in your state, or send you further information on a topic. Please dont hesitate to contact us if we can be of assistance! If you have any questions or comments, contact Heartlands government relations department, atgovernmentrelations@heartland.orgor 312/377-4000.

Read more:

Publications - Research and Commentary: San Francisco Considering Bill that Would Outlaw Smoking in Most Apartment Buildings - The Heartland Institute

Almost a year after mass protests forced the Chilean government to announce plans to revise the countrys constitution, Chileans have voted overwhelmingly to rewrite the current constitution, developed during the dictatorship of General Augusto Pinochet. When exit polls showed that more than 78 per cent of voters had voted for a new constitution, Santiagos Dignity Square filled with ecstatic people, celebrating under the slogan Renace Chile Chile Reborn!

Following its 1973 military coup, Pinochets military junta presided over one of the worlds earliest and most brutal neoliberal experiments. People were in prison, as the Uruguayan writer Eduardo Galeano remarked wryly, so that prices could be free. Chile was an experimental laboratory for neoliberal economic policies, but it was also a testing ground for neoliberal constitutionalism. If Chile today is among the most unequal countries in the OECD, this is in no small part due to the juntas success in consolidating its economic agenda through constitutional means.

Want the best of Religion & Ethics delivered to your mailbox? Sign up for our weekly newsletter.

Chiles Constitution of Liberty was approved in a 1980 plebiscite that was held in a climate of intense repression in which no electoral rolls existed and a blank vote was counted as yes. It provided the blueprint for a free market society protected from democratic interference. The constitution embodied the dictatorships blend of neoliberalism with conservative Catholicism; along with commitments to private enterprise, choice, and market competition, it stressed dignity, freedom of conscience, the protected status of the Church and the centrality of the family as the basic core of society.

Incongruously for a constitution introduced by a military dictatorship, its first article was: Men are born free and equal, in dignity and rights. It would be easy simply to dismiss this rights language as a cynical ploy by a regime that practiced torture and disappearance on a wide scale. But the constitution reflected the neoliberal contention that rights could be used to protect private property and prevent political interference with the inequalities of civil society. The constitution enshrined rights of ownership over all classes of property, including the rights of private citizens over water.

Even what appear to be social and economic rights to health, education, and social security turn out to be rights of private enterprise to compete in offering services on the same terms as the state. The Pinochet constitution prohibited discrimination in favour of state provision, and its right to education gives private companies free rein to offer private schools and universities. Much as intended, these provisions have led to privatisation of much of Chiles education system.

The constitution explicitly aimed to depoliticise Chilean society. It stipulated that educational institutions and intermediate institutions between the individual and the state should be free of politics, and introduced penalties for those who violated this stricture. Going further, it declared it unconstitutional to use or incite political violence or advocate the establishment of a totalitarian system or a society based on class warfare. It banned trade union leaders from being members of political parties, and prohibited public sector workers and many others from going on strike. The real threat to human rights, it stated was terrorism a capacious category that could be extended to include any opponents of the junta and its economic model.

Chicago School economists were central to training a generation of Chilean economists and to promoting the countrys neoliberal shock treatment. But neoliberal thinkers influenced Chiles constitution as much as they shaped its economy. In 1977, during the first of two visits to Chile during the juntas rule, the Austrian neoliberal economist Friedrich Hayek met with Pinochet and discussed his views on the danger of unlimited democracy.

Hayek recalled later that the general listened carefully, and requested that he send him any materials he had written on the question. His secretary recalls that he asked her to send the chapter The Model Constitution from his three-volume work, Law, Legislation, and Liberty. In that chapter, Hayek disparaged the unlimited democracy that prevailed in much of Europe and the Western world. Doubting that a functioning market had ever arisen under such a democracy, Hayek also suggested it was likely that such unlimited democracy would destroy an existing market order. He would prefer a liberal dictator, he told Chiles El Mercurio newspaper, to a democratic government lacking in liberalism.

Chiles 1980 constitution shared its name with Hayeks major work, published two decades earlier, The Constitution of Liberty. In that book, Hayek praised constitutionally limited government for using inviolable individual rights to bind temporary majorities and for preventing interference with the spontaneous order of the market. The role of a constitution, in Hayeks view, was to constrain democracy, and rights existed to secure economic freedom at the expense of social welfare.

Hayek argued that the spontaneous order of the market required an appropriate legal regime to insulate it from political intervention. Rather than advocating laissez-faire, Hayek believed that the rules on which the spontaneous market order rested could be designed. Hayekian neoliberalism aimed to fine-tune the legal framework that would secure submission to the overall market order.

When asked in 1978 whether his account of spontaneous order inherently biased outcomes in favour of past discriminations or past inequities, Hayek responded bluntly: It accepts historical accidents.

It was this conservative reverence for spontaneous evolution and inherited inequalities that made Hayeks thought attractive to Catholic anti-totalitarians in Pinochets administration and to the traditional Chilean right, horrified by the levelling policies of the previous socialist government of Salvador Allende.

Jaime Guzmn, the conservative Catholic legal scholar who drafted the 1980 constitution, attributed his own conversion to neoliberalism to his discovery of Hayek. Guzmn was central to the adoption of a constitution that locked in the juntas reforms by emphasising a version of freedom that prioritised the freedom of property owners and enterprises over the political freedoms of citizens. In Hayeks work, Pinochets crown jurist found proposals for a constitution of liberty that would protect the market from (democratic) interference. In Guzmns vision, preserving economic freedom required suspending the rights of those who threaten the market order.

It was Hayeks mentor, the Austrian neoliberal economist Ludwig von Mises, who spelled out the necessary relation between market freedom and political repression most clearly: in a market economy, the state does not interfere with the market, Mises argued in his magnum opus, Human Action. It employs its power to beat people into submission solely for the prevention of actions destructive to the preservation and the smooth operation of the market economy.

Hayek himself singled out Pinochet and the Portuguese dictator Oliveira Salazar as leaders of authoritarian governments under which personal liberty was safer than under many democracies. In Chile, Hayek praised the junta for its willingness to run the country without being obsessed with popular commitments or political expectations of any kind. The fragile spontaneous order of the market required a strong state to beat into submission those who sought to interfere with market forces.

Following the results of the recent vote to rewrite the constitution, the Financial Times reported that Fitch Ratings had downgraded Chiles sovereign debt from A to A-, on the basis that demands to increase social spending in the wake of last years protests had damaged public finances. It also quoted anonymous critics who warned that replacing the existing constitution would generate spending pressure to fund public services, and so threatened to undermine Chiles fiscal discipline and orthodox economic policy. They may be right. The lesson of Chilean neoliberalism is that economic freedom requires a depoliticised society, and fiscal discipline requires a legal order that protects the market from the people.

If Chile is to be reborn, as those who are celebrating the recent poll results hope it will be, it must break with the discipline that Pinochets regime violently secured, and its constitution sought to lock in in perpetuity.

Jessica Whyte is Scientia Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of New South Wales. She is the author of Catastrophe and Redemption: The Political Thought of Giorgio Agamben and The Morals of the Market: Human Rights and the Rise of Neoliberalism, and an editor of Humanity: An International Journal of Human Rights, Humanitarianism and Development.

See the original post:

Chile Reborn: Overturning Chile's neoliberal constitution - ABC News

Republican and Democratic lawmakers sharply criticized the head of the U.S. Agency for Global Media for his late-night action to repeal a rule meant to protect the Voice of America and other U.S.-funded news networks from editorial interference.

In a statement on the USAGM website and emailed to staff late Monday, CEO Michael Pack said he was using his powers as chief executive to roll back the regulation, known as the firewall rule, because it was harmful to the agencys and national interests.

The regulation was adopted by previous USAGM leadership in June, days before Packwasconfirmedby the Senate as CEO. The rule aimed to consolidate and clarify legal protections Congress had passed separately, including in the 1994 International Broadcasting Act. Packsdecree does not impact the firewall statute in the 1994 Act.

That legislation and subsequent reforms were designed to shelter journalists from interference that could undermine their credibility while at the same time fostering their freedom to report on the United States and its politics and culture from the full range of perspectives.

But in a 33-page notice striking down the rule, Pack characterized it an unconstitutional and unworkable misinterpretation that would undermine U.S. government broadcasting and prevent him from being able to effectively manage and provide editorial oversight of the agency.

New organization

The justification contends that USAGM is different than other news organizations, with a special mission to serve United States interests through Government sponsored news abroad.

Because of this special mission, USAGM and its Networks do not function as a traditional news or media agency and were never intended to do so, the notice says.

By design, their purpose and focusisforeign relations and the promotion of American objectives not simply presenting news or engaging in journalistic expression.

Reaction from Capitol Hill was swift.

Although leaders of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, which oversees USAGM, said Packs action doesnt affect underlying laws that are the foundation for the firewall only Congress could change those the unilateral repeal still risks damaging the networks credibility.

Mr. Pack has shown again and again that he doesnt feel constrained by laws, committee Chairman Eliot Engel, a Democrat from New York, said in a statement.

Engel said he would encourage USAGM journalists to continue carrying out their important work and to ignore illegal interference from Mr. Pack and other administration officials. The law remains on your side.

His Republican counterpart, Rep. Michael McCaul of Texas, told VOA: It is unclear why CEO Pack is opposed to journalistic objectivity at USAGM and its networks. Without it, the mission and effectiveness of the agency is undermined.

Fortunately, the requirement that USAGMs broadcasts be objective and conform with the highest professional standards in broadcast journalism is mandated in statute, he added.

Sen. Chris Murphy, a Democrat from Connecticut on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told VOA the agencys firewall exists to prevent political interference.

"The firewall that was codified as part of the International Broadcasting Act is what distinguishes USAGM-funded networks from state-sponsored propaganda we see in places like Russia and China. We cannot allow the presidents political appointees to influence journalistic content and we must ensure the law remains on the side of the journalists, he said.

Pack was nominated by President Donald Trump to fill the top USAGM job prior to the departure last year of John Lansing, an Obama appointee. The firewall rule was approved under acting CEO Grant Turner and with the support of the previous USAGM board that dissolved when Pack was confirmed in June.

After his arrival, Pack also sidelined Turner and other senior executives at the USAGM, five of whom, including Turner, filed a lawsuit against him and the agency for, among other things, systematic dismantlement of the [agencys] firewall.

USAGM did not respond to VOAs request for comment.Earlier this month,Pack said the lawsuit was "without merit" and thatall ofhis and his team's decisions and actions are "correct and lawful."

The USAGM, with a budget of more than $800 million a year, incorporates five networks:Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio Free Asia, the Middle East Broadcasting Network, and the Office of Cuba Broadcasting. Their combined international audience reaches some 350 million a week on radio, TV and online.

On Tuesday, VOAs acting director, ElezBiberaj,emailed a statement to staff saying repeal of the firewall rule serves only to return VOA to its status of protection prior to Packs arrival, which would not allow government officials to tamper with or otherwise distort VOA content.

He noted that journalistic independence remains under provisions of the 1994 Broadcasting Actand alsothe National Defense Authorization (budget) Act for fiscal year 2017.

New executive power

In his repeal notice, Pack argues that because the agencys news networks are legally required to be consistent with the broad foreign policy objectives of the United States, the firewall rule createdanuntenable conflict.

Ultimately, the notice says, there are times when thepresident, or his appointees, may want to kill a story that, for example, would reveal classified information. They should have the clear ability to do so and to ensure that the decision is carried out by the organization, he wrote.

There have been times in the past when the White House pressured VOA over its news coverage, but Sanford Ungar, a former VOA director and now director of the Georgetown University free speech project, said giving the president the power to censor news would be a catastrophe.

Trump's VOA Criticism Shows US-Funded News Doesn't Mean US-Approved

Public dispute highlights unique position of government-funded, editorially independent journalism

No president of the United States should be able to do that, not just the current one, Ungar said.

Media experts and rights groups, including the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and the Committee to Protect Journalists, warned the repeal could hurt VOAs credibility.

The editorial firewall that protects these media outlets from political pressure is statutory, and the journalists working for these broadcasters are protected by the First Amendment, said Gabe Rottman, director of the technology and press freedom at the reporters committee.

Their success as credible sources of news for millions of people around the world depends upon their editorial independence from political interference, interference which remains illegal and unconstitutional.

The RCFP offers legal resources,including to VOA journalists whose J-1 visas allowing them to work in the U.S. were not renewed under a policy shift instituted by Pack. The committee is one of 16 media groups that signed a letter supporting the lawsuit alleging firewall violations at the USAGM.

Nicholas Cull, professor of public diplomacy at the University of Southern California Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism, said the firewall rule had simply been an attempt to codify standard practice.

Cull, the author of "The Cold War and the United States Information Agency, said he was shocked by Packs action.

A firewall is essential for international broadcasters to be credible in a world market, Cull said.

The BBC has a firewall, Deutsche Welle has a firewall. Radio Pyongyang does not have a firewall. Taking away this kind of firewall, in practice, or in regulation, is not a step toward the BBC. It is a step away from the BBC model. It's a step away from credibility. No international broadcaster should take a step away from credibility, he said.

The rest is here:

USAGM CEO Criticized Over Move to Rescind Firewall Regulation - Voice of America

A surge in outdoor activities because of the coronavirus pandemic fueled new interest in recreational vehicles, helping Winnebago Industries post solid results for its fourth quarter and fiscal year.

The maker of motor homes, towable RVs and travel trailers reported Wednesday that fourth quarter revenue increased 39% to $739 million.

Winnebago based in Forest City, Iowa, but with its management offices in Eden Prairie said some of that increase is tied to the acquisition of luxury motor home maker Newmar Corp. last November.

Absent the acquisition, though, the companys revenue still increased 15% in the quarter, with the strongest performance in the towable RV segment.

In the face of the unprecedented impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, our strong fourth quarter finish to the year was a testament to the incredible resolve of our world-class team, the strength of our portfolio of leading outdoor lifestyle brands, and our efficiency in quickly and safely resuming operations to meet tremendous consumer demand, said Winnebago Chief Executive Michael Happe in a news release.

The pandemic fueled a resurgent interest in outdoor pursuits and products from bicycles to motor homes. The RV Industry Association recently projected that total RV shipments across the industry for 2020 would be 424,400 units, a 4.5% growth in units over 2019, despite an industrywide shutdown of almost two months due to the coronavirus pandemic.

The industry group sees see the sales trends continuing into next year, projecting a record 507,200 units sold in 2021, a 19.5% increase over the projected 2020 total.

This new forecast confirms what we have been seeing across the country as people turn to RVs as a way to have the freedom to travel and experience an active outdoor lifestyle while also controlling their environment, said RV Industry Association President Craig Kirby in a news release.

Airline travel and hotel stays are down due to the pandemic, as companies curtailed discretionary travel and others curtailed recreation travel. However, some families have turned to RVing as an alternative to maintain social distance and other recommendations to stem the spread of the virus.

Our consumers combined the imperative of the safety of their families with their strong desire to be immersed in the experiences they could control, and consequently flocked to the outdoor recreation lifestyle like never before, Happe told analysts on the company earnings call Wednesday.

Winnebago earned $42.5 million, or $1.25 per share, in the fourth quarter, an increase over the $31.9 million, or $1.01 per share, earned in the same quarter last year.

Adjusted EPS for the fourth quarter was $1.45 per share, a 45% increase over the year-ago quarter, and more than 50% better than the 93 cents per share analysts were expecting.

For the full fiscal year, Winnebago had total revenue of $2.4 billion, including $388.4 million in revenue from the Newmar acquisition. The company earned $61.4 million, or $1.84 per share, compared to $111.8 million, or $3.52 per share in fiscal 2019.

Adjusted EPS for fiscal 2020 was $2.58 per share down from the $3.45 in fiscal 2019. The adjusted EPS excludes financing and acquisition related costs.

Winnebago in November 2019 acquired Newmar for $270 million in cash plus 2 million shares of Winnebago stock, to boost its share of the motor home market. Revenue for the motor home segment was $302 million in the fourth quarter, a 50% increase over the fourth quarter last year fueled by the contribution of $126 million in revenue from Newmar during the quarter.

The towables segment, which represents 56% of overall fourth quarter revenue, saw its revenue increase 35% during the quarter to $414 million. The company said backlog for orders in the towables segment increased to a record $748 million, as dealers saw sizable inventory reductions in order to meet surging consumer demand in the fourth quarter.

Winnebago hasnt provided earnings guidance for 2021, but Happe also expressed confidence that the renewed interest in all things outdoors will continue into 2021.

As we look ahead to fiscal 2021, we are encouraged by the ongoing outdoor recreation demand trends we are experiencing, Happe said in the news release. We have built a strong and growing position in the RV market, and our customers continue to view all our brands as a trusted and safe way to have extraordinary experiences as they travel, live, work and play in the outdoors.

Shares of Winnebago closed at $50.39 per share, down 11.7% Wednesday, as Happe mentioned on the earnings call that there are supply chain concerns in the RV and marine markets but that sourcing teams are addressing them. Shares have traded between $16.94 and $72.65 per share over the last 52 weeks.

Go here to see the original:

New consumers driven to the RVing lifestyle fuel solid growth for Winnebago - Minneapolis Star Tribune