Monthly Archives: July 2021

With the assistance of EducationUSA, a program run by the US Department of State that helps international students apply to colleges in the United States, Onuorah learned about Bowdoin.

"EducationUSA helped with my application because my parents could not afford it. So EducationUSA paid for my SATs, gave me tutoring, and gave advice on schools I should apply to. They advised I apply to Bowdoin. So I applied early decision, and I got in!

Arriving at Bowdoin without knowing anyone was a little lonely in the early days, but Onuorah says he now has a large support system that consists of his host family, his first-year floormates, the THRIVE program, his academic advisor Vlad Douhovnikoff, and student clubs like Africa Alliance.

Since his first year at Bowdoin, Onuorah has also been doing research with Douhovnikoff, an associate professor of biology, onticks and river ecology. This summer, they'refocused on monitoring the Androscoggin River, which runs by Brunswick, to prove that the river needs better regulation due to its existing wildlife.

Onuorah says that he believes his three years at Bowdoin have prepared him academically, socially, and culturally to succeed at Dartmouth and into his future. The classes I took at Bowdoin were really tough and I feel like that will prepare me for anything, he said.

Not that he doesn't have a touch of nerves at the prospect of starting anew at Dartmouth. "Bowdoin has always felt protective and leaving Bowdoin and going to another place, it does feel like being a freshman all over again," he said.

However, he's gained a valuable piece of wisdom since coming to study in the United States, one he passes on to others: "Just go for it and seek discomfort."

View original post here:

3...2...1...Blast Off!: Onyedika Onuorah '22 to Jump from the Liberal Arts to Engineering, and then to Space - Bowdoin News

Public financing is contributing to the rise of the far Right in Poland. In May 2021 the countrys Ministry of Culture, National Heritage and Sports announced the results of a competition for funding cultural and scientific periodicals. More magazines with a right-wing, conservative, nationalist or Catholic stance receiving funds than left-wing or liberal-oriented ones. One of the beneficiaries is Polands National Social Institute, which publishes National Politics (Polityka Narodowa), described by Press magazine as a quarterly journal of nationalists associated with the National Movement and All-Polish Youth.

The National Social Institute also received funds from the Civic Organization Development Program, organized by another public institution, the National Freedom Institute Centre for Civil Society Development. The latter presents itself as the first executive agency in the history of Poland responsible for supporting civil society, public benefit activities, and volunteering, and is dedicated to supporting NGOs, civic media, think thanks, and watchdog organizations in the realization of their aims and development strategies.

Catholics and nationalists were among the beneficiaries of the program, with financial support provided to various institutions affiliated with the Catholic Church, foundations focusing on patriotic education, promoting Polish values, or a right-wing narrative of Polish history.

In the framework of the program, two organizations connected with the annual Independence Day Marches, a nationalist event organized every year on 11 November, also received public funds: Youths of the Independence Day March received almost 700,000PLN (152,000) for institutional and missionary development, while Independence Day March received almost 200,000PLN for the development of a Warsaw branch of the nationalist portal, National Media (Media Narodowe).

Organizations connected with the Independence Day Marches received additional funds from another program, the Patriotic Fund, coordinated by another public institution established by the Ministry of Culture and Sports, the Institute for Legacy of Polish National Thought, announced in June 2021. The March of Independence and the National Guard, as well as All-Polish Youth, collectively received more than three million Polish zoty from the Patriotic Fund.

The relatively new foundation, Education for Values (Edukacja do Wartoci), established by the presidents of the ultraconservative legal group Ordo Iuris, also received public funding. Ordo Iuris is an important, professionalized and influential actor within the illiberal segments of Polish civil society. It is known for its involvement in a campaign against the Istanbul Convention, and according to the European Humanist Federation opposes abortion in all cases, same-sex marriage and civil partnerships and sexual education.

In 2016, Ordo Iuris drafted the anti-abortion bill that was submitted by the Stop Abortion coalition as a citizens initiative and considered by the Polish parliament to be scrutinized. As a result, massive mobilization against the bill started in Poland and temporarily stopped the legislation until October 2020, when the Constitutional Tribunal decided to ban abortion in the country. The decision was noted by Ordo Iuris as their success and, on the day before the verdict, it announced that it had sent a friend of the court opinion to the tribunal.

The rest is here:

In Poland, public funding is given to those threatening liberal democracy - Open Democracy

Liberal MP Warren Entsch, who was instrumental in the legalisation of same-sex marriage and the advance of LGBTQI causes in the Coalition, said his position on the draft bill was unambiguous.

Queensland Liberal MP Warren Entsch.Credit:Dominic Lorrimer

I havent spent 19 years of my political career removing discrimination from one section of our community to allow it to be reimposed under the auspices of this bill, he said.

If theres any suggestion that this discrimination is going to be reintroduced, I will not support it, end of story, and Ive made that very, very clear.

The group of Liberals, including Goldstein MP Tim Wilson, NSW senator Andrew Bragg, North Sydney MP Trent Zimmerman and West Australian senator Dean Smith, is working closely with LGBTQI group Equality Australia.

Senator Cash is said to be well aware of the divergent views within the Coalition party room and keen to deliver a bill that navigates the maze without upsetting the apple cart. She has also met with Equality Australia about the bill.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison went to the last election promising a religious discrimination act after failing to deliver on an earlier promise to end exemptions that allowed religious schools to turn away LGBTQI students.

Instead, the Australian Law Reform Commission has been asked to review those exemptions, but they are not due to begin that work until the Religious Discrimination Bill passes the Parliament.

But Senator Bragg said the forthcoming Religious Discrimination Bill should be used to provide protection for LGBTQI students and staff.

I don't think in 2021 people should be sacked for being gay if theyre teaching in accordance with theology, he said.

Mr Wilson said he looked forward to delivering on the Coalitions commitments, but warned: Before the last election we promised a Religious Discrimination Bill consistent with other anti-discrimination law, not a religious freedom bill that grants illiberal special privileges, nor a religious bill of rights that subverts everyone elses freedoms.

Mr Sharma said he was disappointed by the governments failure to fix the issue of religious schools discriminating against LGBTQI students and teachers. That is a real problem that needs addressing. We made a commitment, and we should address it sooner rather than later, he said.

Senator Cash did not respond to a request for comment.

The Morning Edition newsletter is our guide to the days most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up here.

Continued here:

Liberal MPs want Folaus law removed from Religious Discrimination Bill - Sydney Morning Herald

Collingwood Neighbourhood House Infant and Toddler Program educator, Annie Luo, sits alongside children while they play outside, on July 22.

Alia Youssef/The Globe and Mail

The Liberal government is busy signing daycare agreements with provinces, looking to create facts on the ground ahead of an expected election in which it hopes to turn its minority status into a majority.

That was 2005 and is 2021.

Sixteen years ago, then-social development minister Ken Dryden had inked deals with all 10 provinces, with the final two agreements nailed down just five days before the start of the campaign. That meant the Liberals headed into an election needing to sell Canadians on the theoretical benefit of those deals, rather than having an expanded child-care system up and running that would have created a natural constituency.

Story continues below advertisement

Everything was vulnerable, Mr. Dryden recalled in an interview. Given enough time, he believes, Canadians would have seen the benefits of child care in their everyday lives, just as they see the benefit of publicly funded health care and education. Try to reverse those things now, he said. You cant do it, its part of the way you live.

In the 2005-06 campaign, Stephen Harpers Conservatives opposed the Liberal plan to spend $5-billion over five years on expanded child care, saying they would instead send money directly to families, $100 each month for each child under six years of age. The Liberals criticized that as too little to make a difference, with one spokesperson famously saying parents would spend those funds on beer and popcorn.

Swimming against the tide of the sponsorship scandal, the Liberals lost. The Tories, with a minority government, cancelled those child-care agreements.

Which brings us to 2021, with another Liberal minority government negotiating a new set of child-care agreements with the provinces, with a federal election call possible in the next few weeks. British Columbia and Nova Scotia have already signed agreements, and other negotiations are under way.

The parallels with 2005 are obvious enough, but there are some key differences as well. A big one is scale. This time, much more cash is on the table: The Liberals said in their April budget that they plan to spend an additional $30-billion over the next five years, much higher than the $5-billion proposed in 2005, even when inflation is taken into account.

Elizabeth Dhuey, associate professor of economics at the University of Toronto, said the public worry over deficits has withered since 2005, particularly since the pandemic and the onset of deficits running into the hundreds of billions of dollars.

Another major unknown is the stance of the Conservative Party. Sixteen years ago, the Conservatives were clearly opposed to the Liberal daycare plan, saying that (much smaller) version was too costly and intruded on parents decisions about child care. So far, the party isnt stating what it might propose on child care, although in a statement it did criticize the Liberal plan as a one-size-fits-all approach that benefits bureaucrats more than families.

Story continues below advertisement

But the broader political environment has shifted, Mr. Dryden and others observed. He said that in 2005 child care was undeniably part of how Canadian families lived, but even so, many people only apologetically accepted the idea.

Child-care expenditures were seen as a benefit for individual families rather than as social infrastructure to underpin the economy. Or, to put it more bluntly, Mr. Dryden said child care was viewed by some as daytime babysitting. If that were true, the government should no more pay for child care than it should for an evenings worth of babysitting.

The economic case for child care was at least as strong in 2005 as it is now, Prof. Dhuey said. But she said the pandemic has been a catalyst that transformed public perception, with the stresses of working from home surrounded by children becoming all-too-clear lessons in the economic benefits of dependable and widely available child care.

Morna Ballantyne, executive director of the advocacy group Child Care Now, said there is a fear of history repeating itself, and an incoming government cancelling the nascent child-care program. But she said support from the business community is key, in that it underscores the societal need for child care. I think its going to be very hard to roll back.

Another major difference from the debate 16 years ago is the existence of large monthly payments to families. In one sense, the Conservatives won that policy argument. The Universal Child Care Benefit that the Harper government introduced was not only maintained when the Trudeau Liberals took power in 2015, it was expanded to become the Canada Child Benefit (CCB).

Now, families can receive as much as $6,833 for each child under 6 and $5,765 for children aged 6 to 17. Ms. Ballantyne said she believes that the existence of the CCB reframes the argument about funding child-care systems versus paying funds directly to families. Its not an either/or, she said, drawing a contrast with the 2005-06 election. We need both.

Story continues below advertisement

Prof. Dhuey, however, says there may be fiscal pressure in the future to scale back the CCB as federal child-care expenditures rise, and the out-of-pocket cost to families falls.

For his part, Mr. Dryden doesnt believe that Canadians rendered a verdict against child-care expenditures in the 2005-06 campaign, or in favour of cash benefits for families. The overriding issue was the desire for a change after 12 years of Liberal government, he said. People were not voting on either one.

There are parallels in the policies of 2005-06 and this year, Mr. Dryden acknowledges. But the understanding of it, the acceptance of it, is different, he said, adding that he believes the time has finally come for a national child-care program. Because its 2021, period.

Tax and Spend examines the intricacies and oddities of taxation and government spending.

Sign up for the Tax and Spend newsletter.

Originally posted here:

Liberal government negotiates child-care agreements with provinces as history repeats itself - The Globe and Mail

Mark Carney says he wont be on the Liberal ticket if theres an election this fall.

The former governor of the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England told The Canadian Press hes made commitments to help in the global fight against climate change and he cant walk away from them just a few months before a crucial United Nations conference.

I thought long and hard on this because I believe strongly in public service and in the governments agenda, which I fully support, Carney said in an interview Tuesday.

In the end, despite the temptation to running and the wrestling with it, a commitments a commitment.

Carney is the UN special envoy on climate action and finance and also chairs the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero, which aims to bring together banks and asset management firms worldwide to accelerate the transition to an economy based on net-zero carbon emissions.

Story continues below advertisement

His work will be crucial to the success of the UN climate conference, known as COP26, which is scheduled to run from Oct. 31 to Nov. 12 in Glasgow.

Its a critical time in the COP26 process. I made commitments to the (UN) secretary-general and the U.K. prime minister to organize the private sector for net-zero, for a net-zero economy and we have tremendous momentum and I dont want to break that momentum, Carney said.

Trending Stories

I think this is the best contribution I can make right now for Canada, arguably the world, but also for Canada because this matters. This matters hugely to us and this is something I can do, Im in the middle of and I need to see it through.

Carney did not rule out running for the Liberals at another time.

Story continues below advertisement

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is widely expected to call an election for this fall. If he does, Carney said he wanted to put an end to rampant speculation that he would run in a riding in Ottawa, where he lives.

Infrastructure Minister Catherine McKenna announced last month she would not seek re-election in Ottawa Centre. Her surprise decision opened up some prime political real estate that could have become a launching pad for Carney.

There had also been speculation that Ottawa South MP David McGuinty or Kanata-Carleton MP Karen McCrimmon might step aside to open up their Liberal ridings for Carney.

Carney promised in April, during his political debut at the Liberal partys virtual convention, to do whatever he can to support the party.

His name has been bandied about as a potential Liberal leader for at least 10 years.

While he was still Bank of Canada governor in 2012, Carney quietly flirted with the idea of a leadership run, courted by Liberals desperately searching for a new saviour after the 2011 election flame-out.

Story continues below advertisement

But amid criticism that even the smallest whiff of partisanship was undermining the independence crucial to a central banker, Carney eventually squelched the speculation by saying hed just as soon become a circus clown. He left Canada shortly thereafter to take over the helm of the Bank of England.

He returned to Canada last summer and earlier this year released a book promoting his vision for a new kind of capitalism that combines the pursuit of profit with social purpose.

2021 The Canadian Press

Excerpt from:

Mark Carney says he wont run for Liberals if theres a fall election. Heres why - Global News

In three Nova Scotia South Shore ridings, one outcome is almost certain in the Aug.17 provincial election: Lunenburg, Lunenburg West and Queens will each send a woman to the legislature.

Which party the winner representsis up to voters.

Women are running for the three main parties in each ofthe ridings an unprecedented all-female slate but one that does not faze the women seeking the Lunenburg seat.

"I've been asked this question about the number of women candidates. And I mean, I think it's great. I look forward to the day when it's not even notable," said Susan Corkum-Greek, who is running for the Progressive Conservatives in Lunenburg.

Tory Maxine Cochrane from Lunenburg became Nova Scotia's first female cabinet minister in 1985 when she was named minister of transportation.

In the Municipality of the District of Lunenburg, the mayor and eightof 10 councillors are currently women.

"I'll tell you, in 2015, we were the first jurisdiction in Canada to have an MP, an MLA, a mayor and school board chair, who are all women,"said Liberal candidate Suzanne Lohnes-Croft, the incumbent seeking re-election for a third term. "What does that say? That women are strong here. Women have a voice."

New Democrat candidate Alison Smith said:"It's fantastic we have women running in these districts. It says how normal it is for women to come forward," said .

All three parties have strived to put forward a more diverse set of candidates.

The NDP are running 31 womenand four candidates who identify as gender diverse. The PCs are running 19 womenand the Liberals 21.

Nominations close Wednesday for Nova Scotia's 55 ridings.

The Lunenburg West race includes Becky Druhan (PC), Jennifer Naugler (Liberal), Merydie Ross (NDP)and Eric Wade (Green).

In the Queens riding, Mary Dahr (NDP), Kim Masland (PC), Susan MacLeod (Liberal) andBrian Muldoon(Green) are on the ticket.

The three women running in Lunenburg shared their thoughts on the events surrounding Robyn Ingraham, the former Liberal candidate in Dartmouth South. Ingraham dropped out on Day 1of the election citing mental illness.

She later said the party dropped her from the ticket over boudoir photos she had already disclosed, and asked her to lie by citing mental health concerns instead. Ingraham claimed the text of her resignation was supplied by the Liberal Party.

Liberal Leader Iain Rankin said Friday his party helped put together Ingraham's statement saying she'd step down as a candidate, but maintained she withdrew on her own.

Lohnes-Croft said she saw theimages Ingraham referred to the day before the election call, but paid little attention.

"I feel really bad. You see we have all women running in Lunenburg and you know what, this should not be taking place in 2021," saidLohnes-Croft.

"Looking at people's private lives, their personalities, how they look if we're all equals and we are building a campaign on equity, equity, inclusion, diversity, that is important. And we have to really have to change something. And this is a pivotal moment."

Smith, the NDP candidate, called Ingraham's treatment "kind of gross."

"Everyone knows that it's a struggle for women in politics. We are scrutinized to a much greater degree than men are. And frankly, I think that it speaks to how women are held to higher standards all the time."

Corkum-Greek of the PCs said her own mother was bipolar.

"I have lived through the stigma. In my case, it was the shame. You just don't tell people everything you know. And we're trying as a society to get past the stigma of mental illness," Corkum-Greek said.

"To be asked to reference mental illness as part of a spin-doctoring exercise, to explain the withdrawal of her candidacy we talk about people being forthcoming about their mental health challenges and that becomes something you would use in that way, that is the most disturbing part to me."

All three candidates say the Ingraham issue will not decide the election in Lunenburg.

The riding will have its first Green Party candidate since 2009 when it received 1.7 percent of the vote. Former party leader Thomas Trappenberg is running for the Greens.

As incumbent, Lohnes-Croft pointed to spending she and Lunenburg West Liberal cabinet minister Mark Furey delivered to the area. Furey is one of 11Liberal MLAs not reoffering.

She highlighteda new palliative care unit for the Fishermen's Memorial Hospital in Lunenburg. The project was one of many announced in the run up to the election.

"It shows that we've been good advocates for the people of Lunenburg and we've worked hard and we've listened to what are the needs of the municipal units," Lohnes-Croft said.

"It's not easy. We're competing with every MLA, every cabinet minister in Nova Scotia we're all vying for those same dollars in our communities. And, you know, we've worked hard to get there. And I do not want to see that hard work go to waste."

Corkum-Greek said health care is the big issue on doorsteps, especiallyrecent emergency room closures.

"We have the situation locally. Fishermen's hospital was closed on the same night Queen's General [Hospital]was closed, leaving only the South Shore Regional," said Corkum-Greek. "And in that same period, we had the code critical of not having ambulances available. That is very, very worrisome."

It's been 11 years since Pam Birdsall won the seat for the NDP for the first and only time.

Smith said the NDP is offering a platform that helps ordinary voters, like a $15-an-hour minimum wage.

"People don't feel like theirMLA advocates for them. And you look at an issue like housing in our district. We never hear our MLA talk about that. And yet it's huge," Smith said.

"We have people who are homeless in this district they're in the woods. They're at the parks, camped permanently. And our MLA does not make these issues visible. She does not bring them to Halifax."

Go here to see the original:

Unprecedented all-female slates for main parties in three South Shore ridings - CBC.ca

Opponents of Critical Race Theory attend a packed Loudoun County School board meeting in Ashburn, Va., June 22, 2021. (Evelyn Hockstein/Reuters)

A long report from Politico out this morning reveals that the ongoing discontent over critical race theory in public schools isnt confined to conservative or right-leaning parents. In reality, parents across the political spectrum have a host of complaints about whats going on in public schools these days, including the recent push for including CRTs controversial tenets and arguments in public-school curricula.

Here are a few key details from the piece:

On the national level, Democrats have insisted that the brush fires over critical race theory which has become a political punching bag even for unrelated equity initiatives are largely the work of right-wing activists who willfully misrepresent what it means, and they blame Fox News for fanning parents anger.

Thats another right-wing conspiracy. This is totally made up by Donald Trump and [Republican candidate for governor] Glenn Youngkin, Virginia gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe said in June.

I dont think we would think that educating the youth and next and future leaders of the country on systemic racism is indoctrination, said White House press secretary Jen Psaki in May.

But those Democrats appear to be underestimating parents anger in places where critical race theory is top of mind. Objections to new equity plans are not the sole province of conservatives but extend to many moderate and independent voters, according to POLITICO interviews with school board members, political operatives and activists in Democratic and left-leaning communities including the Northern Virginia suburbs of Washington, D.C.; Palm Beach County, Fla.; New Yorks Westchester County; Maricopa County covering Phoenix, Ariz.; and suburban Detroit.

These regions are hardly hotbeds of conservatism, yet what Politicodiscovered talking to experts and parents in these areas disrupts the hardened left-wing narrative about who exactly is getting so upset over CRT and what exactly upsets them so much about it.

One parent who lives outside Detroit told Politico she first began learning about CRT because her daughter had begun to argue that the police should be defunded and that the looting during Black Lives Matter protests was justified. She mother said she has voted Democrat but cant continue doing so in good faith and called her daughters views radical. Along with other parents, she started a group to confront the local school board about CRT in schools.

Over in Loudoun County, Virginia, where I grew up, six members of the local school board are facing recall elections and all of them are backed by the local Democratic Party. If CRT continues to be a major issue in the area, it could threaten the last few years of success that left-wing candidates have had in Loudoun, which has historically been a swing district.

In addition to complaints about curricula becoming too progressive, parents in the suburban areasPoliticostudied complained about drawn-out school closures and school boards that focus too closely on diversity. Another interesting anecdote from the piece:

Bion Bartning, a self-described independent and co-founder of Eos lip balm, became involved in the debate over critical race theory after his daughters private New York City elementary school began implementing changes that included telling students in a video to check each others words and actions for bias.

Thats the opposite of what you want to tell a 5-year-old, Bartning, who is of mixed race, said in an interview. I grew up with very liberal values, and believing in the goal where we judge each other by our character and not by the color of our skin.

According to Politico, parents are especially upset that their various complaints are being dismissed as just being anti-CRT, or, worse yet, that their opposition to CRT is being written off as merely not wanting students to learn about racism. As most good reporting has found since this controversy first arose, hardly anyone on the left or right is complaining about CRT because theyd prefer students not to learn about slavery, racism, or the history of racial conflict in the U.S.

And as this report shows, left-wing proponents of CRT will have to grapple with the fact that it isnt just conservatives who have a problem with their program.

Follow this link:

It Isnt Just Conservative Parents Opposing Critical Race Theory in Schools - National Review

Michael Douglas| Retired Opinion Page Editor

What could bring more summer fun, judicially speaking, than Clarence Thomas, arch conservative justice of the Supreme Court, joining with three liberal colleagues in a stinging dissent?

The moment arrived last month, as the court neared the end of its term, Thomas writing for the four, taking his usual allies to task for their sloppy overreach in a case involving a class action, credit reports and the separation of powers. This case did not attract big headlines. The Thomas dissent did get at something problematic with the courts conservative majority.

Sergio Ramirez set out to buy a car. He went to the dealership, agreed to a price and waited for the credit check. The salesman returned to say the deal was off. Ramirez learned his name matched one on a federal government watch list of terrorists, drug traffickers and other criminals.

The dealership used TransUnion to conduct its credit checks. Ramirez sued the credit reporting company, arguing it violated the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act. It turned out he was one of many such victims of mistaken identity. So, he filed a class action, eventually representing more than 8,000 consumers.

More: Congress considers credit-reporting overhaul, including putting government in charge of scores

The class prevailed at trial, a jury awarding in excess of $60 million, including punitive damages. TransUnion appealed. A federal appeals court trimmed the award yet firmly sided with Ramirez, citing the companys reckless handling of the information.

Which leads to the Supreme Court. Writing for the 5-4 majority, Justice Brett Kavanaugh viewed things differently. He drew a line, separating members of the class, between those like Ramirez who saw the misinformation shared with a third party and those who did not face such exposure.

Kavanaugh concluded that the former, roughly 1,850 consumers, suffered real, or concrete, harm. He added that the rest, around 6,300, were not injured, the unshared credit reports no more than if someone wrote a defamatory letter and then stored it in her desk drawer.

No concrete harm, no standing, he summed up.

By standing, Kavanaugh means the ability of an individual to file a lawsuit in federal court. To gain entry, a person must show an injury in fact. In short, he held that the 6,300 had no cause to sue.

Sound reasonable? After all, that credit report wrongly marking you as a terrorist remained tucked away, right?

Justice Thomas hardly holds back in his astonishment, noting how his colleagues have upset decades of court precedent. He describes their approach as remarkable in both its novelty and effects.

As his dissent makes clear, this isnt what Congress intended in crafting the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Lawmakers, along with the president, required credit reporting companies to follow procedures to ensure maximum possible accuracy, to send, when a consumer requests, the complete credit report and to inform consumers of their legal rights and how to dispute the misinformation.

Thomas highlights how TransUnion fell short on these measures in violation of the law. He notes that before Ramirez, the company faced trial on similar grounds. It lost and then didnt bother to make improvements.

Most important, Congress established a legal right for consumers to take such poor performers to court. This goes to the core of the congressional job. Lawmakers understood the true risk of injury to consumers in flawed information surfacing in a credit report, whether it landed with a third party or not.

Thomas stresses: But even setting aside everything already mentioned the Constitutions text, history, precedent, financial harm, libel, the risk of publication and actual disclosure to a third party one need only tap common sense to know that receiving a letter identifying you as a potential drug trafficker or terrorist is harmful.

He adds that is especially so when the subject is a credit report, the entire purpose of which is to demonstrate that a person can be trusted.

So, much is at stake for consumers, just as Congress conceived, and now the court majority has substituted its judgment for that of elected representatives. It has invited judges to challenge lawmakers about what harm is concrete, tipping the balance of power toward the judiciary.

This isnt just about an absence of common sense or failing to grasp the significance of credit reports. The Thomas dissent rings: What happened to judicial modesty? Now doubts gather around other laws in which Congress has established a right for sue, not to mention the narrowing of class actions going forward.

Of course, Justice Thomas hasnt always been so restrained. On the final day of the courts term, he joined in the ruling weakening the Voting Rights Act, the second time a conservative majority has eroded a key provision of the landmark legislation. It has done so though Congress renewed the law in 2006 with overwhelming bipartisan majorities. That, too, is judicial arrogance.

Douglas is a retired Beacon Journal editorial page editor. He can be reached at mddouglasmm@gmail.com.

Read the original post:

What happened to judicial modesty? Justice Clarence Thomas wants to know - Akron Beacon Journal

By Mike Baker

Judi Forbes, a small business owner and retired bank manager, will stand as the Liberal candidate in Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock in the next federal election.

The local Liberal association announced on July 14 that Forbes had successfully completed the nomination application process and has been acclaimed as the partys candidate.

The next federal election is set to take place on or before Oct. 16, 2023.

Forbes and her family have lived within the Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock region for the past 10 years, residing in Beaverton. In a release to media last week, the Liberal association described her as a passionate volunteer who is dedicated to helping others. Forbes currently serves as board chair of a nursing home within the riding, treasurer of the Brock Board of Trade and chairs the Brock Tourism Advisory Committee.

She represented the party in the 2019 federal election, receiving 17,067 votes, good enough for 26 per cent of the local vote. She finished second behind sitting Conservative MP Jamie Schmale.

With a little over two years to go before the next federal election, Forbes says she intends to spend that time wisely and connect with area residents to build on the foundations she believes the party established in the local riding in 2019.

The most pressing concern for her, however, is ensuring communities across the riding remain strong and recover from the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.

I am a lot like many others in this riding. I work hard and I care for my family, my friends and my community, Forbes said. I have been affected, as many here have been, by this pandemic and I will work hard to bring to the residents of Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock the kind of progress we have seen in neighbouring ridings.

She added, I will fight for the support needed for all communities in this riding to recover better and stronger.

See the original post:

Forbes to stand for Liberals once again in upcoming federal election - Haliburton County Echo

Hand-wringing about the plight of migrants crossing the Channel and Mediterranean by boat -and angry words about their treatment - will only go so far. What would liberal progressives actually like to see done?

Much of the world is on fire: Syria remains in the throes of a years-long civil war, Ethiopia is close to embarking on one, just months after its prime minister was awarded a Nobel prize, Afghanistan faces a new Taliban era, and famine, persecution and civil strife force millions of people across the globe to seek sanctuary elsewhere.

Many of those people entirely understandably look to the relative peace and stability of Europe and the UK for refuge. And despite the huge obstacles in their way the safe routes here have all been blocked are prepared to make the dangerous journey to our shores.

In both the UK and Europe, a fixation with the daily arrival of boats, across the Channel and the Med, excites the anger of many and the compassion of others. Neither response seems to be proving particularly helpful in finding a solution.

The reaction of many European countries has been to turn to populists and to try to further close their borders. That is the response of home secretary Priti Patel and the Conservative government of which she is part, too.

Despite us being on the western fringe of the European continent and getting just a trickle of asylum seekers relative to other countries, our government has been keen to use some of the worlds most vulnerable as an easy source of political credit, vowing to make it even harder to seek respite in the UK, despite asylum being a fundamental right recognised in international law.

Patel might be offering nothing in the way of insight or in compassion but all too often the liberal response to the issue of refugees is no better, warmer words aside.

It is easy to say we dont want asylum seekers drowning off our shores, or living in squalid and unsafe conditions in detention centres, and certainly that people should not be shipped to Australian-style prison islands.

But when it comes to saying what we actually want to happen, those of us of a socially democratic persuasion often have less to say and thats because the issue itself is often quite a difficult one. What is it we actually think we should do for the worlds refugees?

One thing we should stop doing is pretending that every refugee crisis in the world is the direct fault of the UK it is neither a true argument nor a politically winning one.

The UK clearly holds some responsibility for the rise of ISIS across Iraq and Syria, and should recognise that. Similarly, we have a broader colonial legacy that has done a lot of harm across much of the world. But equating that with the UK being the cause of the worlds miseries itself removes the agency from the people of the affected countries: when Bashar al-Assad murders his own civilians, he is the person who should be held accountable for that. We should not act as if those of us in liberal democracies are the only people on the planet with agency.

Leaving that point aside, we are left to the practicalities: in a world where millions of people are displaced by persecution, war, natural disasters or famines, what do we do? One step is to make sure we join up our thinking on different border crossings the UK does not exist in isolation versus the rest of the world.

Countries on the eastern and southern borders of the EU have closed many of the relatively safe (land-based) border crossings used by those who would seek asylum. The result is desperate people trying to cross the Mediterranean landing them in the same countries battling to keep them out.

Part of those border countries antagonism to refugees is the unwillingness of the EU to fully commit to fairly sharing the burden of hosting refugees. In theory. people accepted as legitimate asylum seekers should be distributed across EU nations, and there is financial support available to arrival countries from those further away.

In practice, such measures always come a day late and a dollar short, meaning that anti-asylum politicians all too often are propelled to political power in the affected countries. The result is a vicious cycle: the inflow of refugees becomes visible because people have to highlight the death and danger it involves.That keeps the issue high up the news agenda, which leads to calls for political action, and so on and so forth. Even if the current tactics cut the number of asylum seekers by 80%, their increased visibility produces a toxic political mix.

This Mediterranean crisis fuels, in turn, the crossings of the Channel with few options in Europe and hostile political environments in so many countries, the UK becomes an incredibly attractive option for those with the resources to reach it, not least because many more people speak English than other European languages, and want that head start towards integration.

As we, like the EU, have closed off most safe and legitimate routes to claiming asylum, boats become the option of last resort. And once again, the harsh approach fails on its own terms keeping the crossings in the headlines, with all the divisiveness that entails, while helping almost no-one.

The current approach fails on its own terms. Going harsher would do the same it would simply incentivise media coverage of the issue, both from right wing papers highlighting that even these new draconian measures got missed and people slipped through, and from activists trying to expose what would, from experience, surely be grim and dangerous conditions, if asylum seekers were kept offshore somewhere, for instance.

Some of us might think the right thing to do is to just drop restrictions or quotas altogether, and say that anyone found to be a genuine refugee always a tricky thing to define, but lets park that for today would be welcome to seek asylum in the UK. This would certainly feel morally admirable, but it may not prove either politically or practically sustainable.

The main problem is that the world is so chaotic and dangerous now that there are huge number of people seeking asylum almost all of them living in poorer countries. UN statistics suggest there are more than 25 million refugees around the world, alongside a further 50 million people displaced within their own country.

More than 80% of those people are in developing world countries richer nations do far, far less than their fair share here. Turkey alone, for example, has more than 3.6 million refugees despite having a population only slightly higher than the UKs.

A wave of several hundred thousand skilled immigrants from eastern Europe in the 2000s prompted a political backlash that created the Brexit movement. An influx of millions of refugees would risk political consequences even more dire assuming it ever got approved as a proposal in the first place. And that's not even to consider the damage it could do to countries suddenly denuded of much of their populations.

A sincere effort to do more as a good global citizen while also making asylum a smaller political issue would have to be a compromise. People do not spend thousands of pounds often all the money they have in the world and risk the lives of their children for fun or out of spite. They do it because they have no other choices. Giving people safer and better choices is the way to end the Mediterranean and Channel boat crises.

The government repeatedly says it wants people to take legitimate routes to seek asylum in the UK essentially asking people in camps in Turkey or elsewhere to apply for UK entry from there. This would be a safer and fairer option, if only it were a real one: an unfairness of entry by boat is that it is an option only open to relatively rich, middle-class asylum seekers. Poorer families cant even afford it.

The issue with the legitimate channels is people know their odds of success are astronomically low, because we take so few people from them. Instead of a trickle of a few thousand people, we should take hundreds of thousands. If we manage to make the terms fair, and let people work as they come, that could be increased over time if there was a lack of political backlash.

We pride ourselves often undeservedly on being a nation that believes in fair play, and yet as it stands we have set up a game for refugees where it is impossible to win without cheating, and then we condemn the cheaters who actually get here. Un-rigging the rules of the game might just be able to please everyone.

Finally, we have to remember to stand for what we believe, and to have and try to win the argument. If we have politicians that believe in the moral and ethical case for asylum, they should make that case, rather than dodging the issue or trying to deflect it.

Part of why we have ended up with a hostile environment is that almost no politicians challenged it. If we want to be a global Britain, and a good global citizen, we should help our neighbours when they are in need. We can hope otherwise, but one day we might need that help in turn, too we dont want to be forced to hope that other people are kinder than we managed to be.

More:

What is the liberal response to the migrant crisis? - The New European