Mediaboss Marketing

As someone involved in healthcare (public and private) since the 70s, I have written so many columns about Georgias lame response to COVID that it is hard to determine where to start. But I will give it the old school try, starting with the misconception spread by libertarians that we have done a good job on COVID prevention in Georgia. We have not.

First, it would be good to understand how COVID spread across the U.S.

It first hit the U.S. with a vengeance in high population-density blue areas like New York and California. So, at the beginning, cases and deaths were much higher in these Democrat-controlled areas. But that changed as the pandemic spread.

And, as opposed to other nations, COVID became a political issue in the U.S.

Democrats thought President Donald Trump was doing a horrible job of controlling the pandemic. Republicans trusted that he was doing well and believed Trumps claim that rising case numbers were only due to more testing. Objective studies now prove that the U.S. did much more poorly than other democracies. A report in Infection Control Today notes that the data does show that the United States is below average in the world and among the worst in the developed and high-income nations.

By September of 2021, death rates were much higher in red counties. Per one objective study, the coronavirus death rate among the 20% of Americans living in counties that supported Trump by the highest margins in 2020 was about 170% of the death rate among the 1-in-5 Americans living in counties that supported Biden by the largest margins.

And that trend continues to this day, including in Georgia. Compare socialist Vermonts cases (12 per 100,000) with Georgia (35 per 100,000). Then look at vaccinations: Georgia- only 57% fully vaccinated (with about 40% of them boosted) versus Vermont at 82% (63% of them boosted). So, more people are getting it here and they are sicker when they do. The question is why?

The answer is that in our nation and state populist politics has gotten in the way of modern healthcare practices.

In February and March of 2020, our nation and states were in crisis mode, although CDC guidance was hamstrung both by politics and general incompetence. Many states, particularly the blue ones, began taking strong actions on their own to control the spread.

But it took until April 2 that year for Gov. Brian Kemp to eventually get around to issuing a shelter in place executive order, finally joining 42 other states that had already done so. Local Georgia Boards of Health are virtually powerless to act under state law (and they still are).

So, counties and cities must take action when the state does not.

The Georgia Municipal Association (GMA) model ordinance declared a much-broader public health state of emergency. However, many local governments were also slow to act to approve it. For example, where I live in Peachtree City, the libertarian-oriented then-Mayor issued a very weak emergency order. Plus, it had numerous major holes in it compared to the GMA model. Among the shortcomings: restaurant in-dining was still permitted, and day care centers were still open, as were hair and nail salons, gyms, fitness centers, pools and so on.

So, the virus spread.

Due to lack of leadership by Kemp, Georgia is still behind the blue states and the nation regarding COVID measures. And he is getting way with it due to the destructive libertarian streak in the GOP and the failure of some of the media to point out our factual shortcomings.

What concerns me is that there are still non-healthcare people spreading misconceptions. There are still people incorrectly pointing to President Biden getting COVID (which has been like a cold for him because he was vaccinated and boosted) and saying that is proof the vaccinations dont work.

They ignore the fact that without the vaccine, he might have died.

In conclusion, please look at the data before saying measures like masking and vaccinations do not work. Ask healthcare professionals rather than believing talking heads.

Jack Bernard, a former health care executive, was the first director of health planning for Georgia. Hes a former chairman of the Jasper County Commission. Given events of late, he now describes himself politically as a former Republican.

Read more from the original source:
Opinion: Where Georgia blew it on COVID - The Atlanta Journal Constitution

New York City Mayoral Candidates Campaign On Last Day Before Primaries

Michael M. Santiago/Getty

On Wednesday, several former Republican and Democratic officials announced a new national political party the "Forward Party" to appease the growing number of voters who see America's two-party system as dysfunctional.

Speaking to Reuters, who exclusively broke the news, the party's leaders cited a Gallup poll last year showing a record two-thirds of Americans believe a third party is needed. The Forward Party will have centrist views, though specific policies have not yet been laid out.

To get running, the new third party is co-chaired by former Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang and former Republican governor of New Jersey Christine Todd Whitman.

The party's official launch will be in Houston on Sept. 24. Party leaders also plan to hold a series of events around the nation this autumn to rally support, then host the party's first national convention in a major U.S. city next summer.

RELATED: More Than 100,000 Republicans Left the Party Since January, Registration Data Shows: Report

The new party is the result of three alternative political groups coming together. The merger involves the Renew America Movement, formed in 2021 by former officials in the Republican administrations of Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush and Donald Trump; the namesake Forward Party, founded by the formerly Democratic and independent Yang; and the Serve America Movement, led by former Republican Rep. David Jolly.

Though vague, the Forward Party aims to "reinvigorate a fair, flourishing economy" and to "give Americans more choices in elections, more confidence in a government that works, and more say in our future," Reuters reports.

RELATED: #WeCanDoBetter: 'Never Trump' Republicans Turn to Dreams of Drafting 'Adult' Third-Party Candidate

Third parties don't generally take off in America, given its deep-rooted two-party setup. But in today's hyper-politicized environment, it could certainly affect future elections and if history repeats itself, it may come at a cost to Democrats.

Story continues

In the infamous 2000 presidential election, Green Party candidate Ralph Nader got just enough support to strip Democratic nominee Al Gore of the win, handing Republican nominee George W. Bush the presidency. In 2016, Green Party's Jill Stein and Libertarian Party's Gary Johnson are partially credited with Donald Trump's victory over Hillary Clinton.

Understandably, Democrats are already expressing fear that Yang's new group will tamper with the fragile 2024 election.

If Forward succeeds at carrying out its goals, it will be on the ballot in all 50 states by late 2024, Reuters reports. In addition to looking at nominating someone for president in the next election, it will focus on elevating candidates for local, state and congressional elections.

Go here to read the rest:
Andrew Yang to Lead New Political Party Aiming to 'Reinvigorate' Economy: What It Means for Future Elections - Yahoo! Voices

The Department of Justice is urging a federal judge to allow a lawsuit to proceed against the embattled Alabama town of Brookside, arguing there is evidence that town officials profited from hefty police fines and rising criminal cases.

Courts, prosecutors, and police should be driven by justicenot revenue, the DOJ stated in a brief filed Tuesday.

A class-action lawsuit one of more than a dozen lawsuits against the town alleges officials abused their power in issuing tickets, fining drivers and towing vehicles to raise revenue. But Brookside earlier this month asked a judge to dismiss the lawsuit.

The DOJ filed its brief in support of the drivers.

Indeed, Brooksides overall funding scheme where the municipal courts generate significant funding for Brookside, which in turn funds those same courts appears from Plaintiffs allegations to create a starker conflict than those in other cases where courts have found due process violations, the brief states.

Carla C. Ward, an assistant U.S. Attorney for the northern district of Alabama, in the brief said that the federal government has an interest in protecting the publics constitutional rights and enforcing federal laws regarding the collection of unlawful fines and fees.

Brookside has been at the center of controversy since January when AL.com published an investigation that detailed how the towns police aggressively ticketed drivers while the municipal court collected fines and fees that accounted for half the towns revenue.

In Brookside, revenue from fines and fees increased more than 600 percent from 2018-20, with most of the money going back into the police department and municipal court.

The Justice Departments statement recognizes that Brooksides abusive system of policing for profit violates the Constitution, and that the town should be held accountable, said Jaba Tsitsuashvili, an attorney for the Institute for Justice, the libertarian non-profit that filed the class action lawsuit against Brookside. No one should live in fear of being ticketed, fined, or having their car towed for the sake of raising police revenue.

[Read more: Inside the remarkable rise and fall of Alabamas most predatory police force]

In its brief, the DOJ points out that Mark Parnell, the Brookside prosecutor, and Jim Wooten, the municipal judge, saw pay increases as the number of criminal cases rose during recent years.

Wootens salary increased 127 percent, from $8,800 in 2019 to $20,000 in 2021. Because court fines and fees help fund the town council, the brief says, the councils control over the appointment, tenure, and salary of the municipal judge undermines the municipal judges neutrality.

Parnells pay rose 241%, bringing his total pay last year from Brookside to $72,115. The prosecutor previously told AL.com his pay went up because he was spending more time in court due to the increasing caseload.

In short, the town attorney not only stands to profit economically from vigorous enforcement of Brooksides municipal codehe already has: the more cases he opts to prosecute, the more money he makes, the DOJ brief says.

Attorneys representing Brookside didnt respond to a request for comment before publication.

The Justice Departments statement recognizes that Brooksides abusive system of policing for profit violates the Constitution, and that the town should be held accountable, said Jaba Tsitsuashvili, an attorney for the Institute for Justice, the libertarian non-profit that filed the class action lawsuit against Brookside. No one should live in fear of being ticketed, fined, or having their car towed for the sake of raising police revenue.

[Read more from our Banking on Crime series]

Read the original here:
Feds side with drivers suing Alabama town, cite evidence of Brookside policing for profit - AL.com

New research provides evidence that antisemitic attitudes are far more prevalent on the political right in the United States. The study, published in Political Research Quarterly, indicates that prejudicial attitudes towards Jews is particularly strong among younger conservatives.

High profile incidents in the United States have raised concerns about the resurgence of antisemitism. While many of these incidents have been linked to the far right, other such incidents have been linked to left-wing groups. But the authors behind the new study observed that there was very little research into whether hatred toward Jews was more common among the far right or the far left.

This started with conversations with Laura Royden, a PhD student at Harvard and my co-author on three studies on this topic. A few years ago, popular books about antisemitism (by Bari Weiss and by Deborah Lipstadt) discussed antisemitism in the United States as coming from both the ideological left and right, explained study author Eitan D. Hersh (@eitanhersh), an associate professor of political science at Tufts University.

The authors had interesting anecdotes about left versus right antisemitism. But Laura and I noticed there wasnt much quantitative research about the relationship between political ideology and antisemitic attitudes. So we started working on a study that would capture different manifestations of anti-Jewish prejudice across the ideological spectrum. We focused the study on young people because past research had suggested that the young left and young right are hotbeds of antisemitism.

Using the polling company YouGov, the researchers surveyed 3,500 U.S. adults, including a representative oversample of 2,500 adults ages 1830, regarding their political ideology and attitudes towards Jews. Political ideology was measured using a 7-point scale. The respondents were also asked whether they identified as leftist, socialist, progressive, libertarian, Christian conservative, or alt-right.

The survey assessed subtler forms of prejudicial views (anti-Jewish double standards) as well as overtly antisemitic attitudes. For example, the respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with antisemitic statements such as Jews are more loyal to Israel than to America and Jews in the United States have too much power.

The researchers found evidence of an anti-Jewish double standard on the left. Those on the political left held Jewish Americans more responsible for the actions of Israel than they held Catholic Americans or Indian Americans responsible for the Vatican or India.

Additionally, 31% of very liberal respondents said Muslim Americans should denounce Muslim countries discrimination against non-Muslims, whereas 47% said that Jewish Americans should denounce Israels discrimination against non-Jews. Very conservative respondents showed an opposite pattern an anti-Muslim double standard.

However, Hersh and Royden found that young far-right Americans were seven times more likely to believe that Jewish Americans should be held to account for Israel compared to young far-left Americans.

Moreover, the researchers found that agreement with overtly antisemitic statements increased from left to right. Agreement with the statements was 2-3 times higher on the far right compared to the far left. Even when primed with information that most U.S. Jews have favorable views toward Israel a country disfavored by the ideological left respondents on the left rarely support statements such as that Jews have too much power or should be boycotted, the researchers noted.

In terms of ideology and antisemitism, we find that overt antisemitic attitudes are much more common on the young far right than the young far left, Hersh told PsyPost. The young right holds more prejudicial views than older conservatives as well as than liberals of all ages. On the left, we see some evidence of anti-Jewish double standards, where Jews are held to a different standard of accountability for a foreign country than are other minorities groups, such as Muslim Americans or Indian Americans. But the level of agreement with antisemitic claims is much higher on the right.

In this paper, we also briefly discuss a separate set of findings (which we dive into in a whole separate paper, under review) that, quite separate from an ideological effect, there is a big racial effect, Hersh added. Young Black and Hispanic Americans are as likely to agree to antisemitic statements as the White alt-right. Differences by racial group are apparent both among liberals and conservatives.

The researchers controlled for factors such as age, race, and education. But the study like all research includes some caveats.

We measured antisemitism in a few ways in the paper, but there are other ways to measure these prejudicial attitudes, Hersh explained. Some people have suggested to us that the young left and young right could have similar antisemitic views but the right is either more willing to say what they think than the left or they are more eager to agree to statements they know are anti-politically correct even if they dont really believe them. Obviously, lots can be going on beneath the surface of these findings. But we hope that this study helps re-orient research on this topic around careful, replicable social science.

We just released all the survey data if any other researchers want to look it over and write their own papers! https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataverse/antisemitism

The study, Antisemitic Attitudes Across the Ideological Spectrum, was published June 25, 2022.

See more here:
Overt antisemitism is 2 to 3 times stronger on the American far right compared to the far left, study finds - PsyPost

Zachary Hurwitz of Narragansett is too young to havecast a ballot in a stateelection before, but he's not too young for Rhode Islandersto make him governorthis November.

In between shifts at the Coffee 'NBagel Connection on Boston Neck Roadandpreparing forclassesat the University of Rhode Islandin the fall, the18-year-old North Kingstown High School graduatecollected the 1,000 signatures necessary to qualify for the gubernatorial ballot, according to Secretary of State Nellie Gorbea's office.

"During my sophomore year, during COVID,while people were sitting around and watching 'Tiger King,' I wasresearching thetopic, and I realized I could do it," he said Friday. "Politics hasalways been a big part of my life."

The top issue on his platform is making the stateprovide free lunches and breakfasts to all students at public K-12 schools.

Rhode Island Primary Voting Guide: Everything you need to know to get your ballot

Hurwitz, whose father is president of health care research company Clarity Science,said he is running as an ideological moderate to "work across party lines."

He wasn't eligible to vote in the 2020 presidential election, and he said he was not sure whom he would have voted for if he had been.

It's a long shot, to say the least, but if Hurwitz wereelected he'd be the youngest Rhode Island governor ever.

William Spraguewas 30 when he became governor in 1860, the youngest to do so under the state Constitution, according to State Librarian Megan Hamlin-Black. (William CoddingtonJr. of Newport was 32 when he entered office in 1683 under the old Royal Charter.)

The lastindependent to be elected governorwas Lincoln Chafee in 2010.That year Hurwitz was 6.

More: Former McKee chief of staff did not break the law but exercised 'poor judgment,' AG says

To be eligible to become governor, you have to be18 years and 30 days old on Election Day. Hurwitz reached that ageby the end ofMay.

He is the first candidate to make the ballot for governor who was born in the 21st century.

Five other candidates declared to run for governor as independents (which includes members of the Libertarian Party), but none filed the necessary signatures to get on the ballot.

That includes vaccination mandate criticPaul Rianna Jr., who came up 48 signatures short, according to Gorbea's office.

Libertarian Elijah Gizzarelli came up 61 signatures short andis challenging the rejectionof some of his signatures.

More: Legislative grants and how RI lawmakers spend taxpayer money in an election year

Candidates or interestedpartieshad until 4 p.m. Friday to challenge any signatures that were not accepted and might have allowed them to qualify, or to challenge the validity of signatures that were submitted.

According to Johnathan Berard, Gorbea's deputy director of communications, there were 10 challenges filed, including Gizzarelli's.

They include the campaign manager for Warwick DemocraticSenate candidate Jennifer Rourke challenging the signatures handed in by Michael Carreiro for the Senate seat being vacated by Majority Leader Michael McCaffrey.

Rep. Brianna Henries, D-East Providence, ischallengingAshley Pereira, who is challenging her in the Democratic primary for House District 64.

More: Candidates by same name in neighboring districts? That's no typo they're father and son

Back in the governor's race, five Democrats qualified for the Sept. 13primary ballot: Matt Brown, Helena Buonanno Foulkes, Nellie Gorbea, Dan McKee and Luis DanielMuoz.

There will also be a Republican primary for governor, as JonathanRiccitelli qualified along with thebetter-funded Ashley Kalus.

Riccitelli came in a distant fourthplace, with 2.7% of the vote, in his2018runas an independentto become lieutenant governor. He later applied for appointment to the post by McKee, who chose someone else.

Riccitelli bills himself as the "only 100% Rhode Islander Running for Governor [as a]Republican."

He describes Kalus, a relative newcomer to Rhode Island who has built her name recognitionwith nonstop TV and radio ads since spring, as a "woman who at one point lived here in her past. Left to a better state that could meet her family's needs. Then came back when her husband was awarded $7 millionplus contract to do covid testing sites."

A self-described small-business owner, the 40-year-old Riccitelli who has not yet reported raising or spending any campaign money explained in a press release he posted on his Facebook page in May why he wants to be governor.

"Firstly, because I have the sensibility and more than the capabilities to redirect the atmosphere of what the current and prior administrations have left or are leading Rhode Islanders to live with. But mostly because I was asked by a good number of residents, that said I should and now is that time."

Over in the 2nd Congressional District, there won't be a Republican primary unless Donald Robbio is successfulchallenging the rejection of signaturesthat leaves him82 namesshort of appearing on theballot against Allan Fung.

Moderate Party Chairman William Gilbert, who ran unsuccessfully for governor in 2018, made the general election ballot for the 2nd District. (Gilbert took 2.7% of the vote in 2018.)

In 2014, some Republicans believed the 69,000 votes Robert Healey received for the Moderate Party cost Fung the governor's race in his 4-point loss to Raimondo.

Six Democrats made the ballot for the 2nd Congressional District primary: Omar Bah, Spencer Dickinson, Joy Fox, Seth Magaziner, Sarah Morgenthau and David Segal.

In the General Assembly, nineRepublicans who filed to run for the Senate and 18 candidates who filed to run for the Housefailed to return nominating papers or meet the signature threshold.

That leaves43 Republicans seeking seats in the House and29 in the Senate for a total of 72.

Barring last-minutedevelopments, five Senators are cruising to reelectionwithout opposition, as well as 18 House members. The unopposed are: Sens.Jessica de la Cruz,Ana Quezada, Hannah Gallo, Joshua Miller and Leonidas Raptakis; and Reps.Nathan Biah, John Lombardi, Scott Slater, Jose Batista,JacquelynBaginski, Arthur Handy, Thomas Noret, Sherry Roberts, Samuel Azzinaro, Mary Ann Shallcross Smith, Stephen Casey, William O'Brien, Joshua Giraldo, Karen Alzate, Terri Cortvriend, Marvin Abney, Alex Finkelman and Lauren Carson.

In the lieutenant governor's race, Sabina Matos, Cynthia Mendes and Deborah Ruggiero made the ballot for the Democratic primary, but former state Rep. Larry Valencia, who in May said he would run on a platform of eliminatingthe office, did not collect enough signatures to qualify.

Aaron Guckian and Paul Pence will face off for the GOP lieutenant governor nomination, while Ross McCurdy qualified for the general election ballot as an independent.

Democrat Peter Neronha and Republican Charles Calenda qualified for the attorney general ballot with no independents making it.

Democrats James Diossa and Stefan Pryor made the ballot for general treasurer, and James Lathrop made the ballot as aRepublican.

In the race for secretary of state, Gregg Amore will face Stephanie Beaute in the Democratic primary. Anthony Tamba is challenging the ruling that he came up 28 signatures short.

Pat Cortellessamade the ballot as a Republican.

Continued here:
A college freshman for governor? See who made and missed the Rhode Island ballot - The Providence Journal