Mediaboss Marketing

From Texas Standard:

Editor's note: Between the reporting and airing of this story, Austin Resource Recovery's director, Ken Snipes, told the Texas Standard that masks are now provided for employees.

Interstate 35 is a vital transportation artery cutting across Texas, south to north. It stretches from Mexico, through Dallas and eventually ends up in Canada. The highway is essential for keeping goods flowing between the three largest countries in North America everything from produce to medical equipment is trucked along it. And it's especially important during the pandemic as people are more aware of the vulnerability of the supply chain.

But the highway is also a divider. It splits the population of Texas into two very uneven sectors. A large majority of Texans live east of I-35, says Texas State Demographer Lloyd Potter.

Its 87% of our population, he says.

And it creates local divisions, too. In Austin, I-35 divided the city by race, starting in the mid-20th century. And it wasnt by accident. Eliot Tretter, author of Shadows of a Sunbelt City: The Environment, Racism and the Knowledge Economy in Austin, says I-35 became a monument that separated white Austin from non-white Austin a means of segregation.

Some people call [Austin] the Dual City or the Apartheid City, Tretter says.

That duality is especially apparent during the COVID-19 pandemic, and particularly during the early morning. In west Austin at that time of day, there's an atmosphere of peacefulness. The west side tends to be wealthier, and many people there work from home right now. So, at, say 5:30 a.m. or 6:00 a.m., many residents are still asleep. But in parts of east Austin, there's a buzzy atmosphere as some residents head to work in jobs deemed essential by the state. But that buzziness can also make it feel like an alternate reality, as if the virus doesn't exist.

Daniel Perez is an eastsider with an essential job. He starts work at 5:30 a.m., installing kitchen cabinets. People like Salvador and Erica are also ready to work early in the morning. They are unauthorized immigrants, so Texas Standard decided to only use their first names. Salvador is a roofer. Erica works for a house cleaning service.

Even the grocery stores in east Austin open early to service the constant stream of workers who stop by to grab a case of bottled water, or cleaning supplies or a bite to eat before heading to work.

Andrew Roberson works for the city of Austins waste management department, Austin Resource Recovery. As he climbs into a recycling truck, armed with his breakfast in one hand and an orange juice in the other, the protective gear that is ubiquitous in the city nowadays is, strangely, nowhere on his body.

Im on the front line every day and I havent got no pension for it. Im not even given a mask. [And, yet], I touch everyones recycle and trash cans, Roberson says.

Without a vaccine, the primary weapons against COVID-19 are staying home, washing hands and wearing masks. Roberson doesnt have any of those protections.

The new coronavirus doesnt discriminate; anyone can become infected. But some people, like Roberson, face more risk because of their race, job or socioeconomic status. It's unclear why the city of Austin hasn't provided him with a protective mask.

Tretter says these oversights could be explained by looking at how our culture treats these workers under regular circumstances. Things that we've accepted as "normal" risks in certain jobs, like environmental hazards, can be rationalized as part of a course of how we build cities, he says.

From exposure, to pollution on highways, to lead paint, to where people live, to who has the right to live and die" all of that has been absorbed into a sort of ethos that a resident might buy into while living in the city.

Democratic state Rep. Donna Howard says COVID-19 has revealed troubling attitudes about whose lives are valued and whose aren't.

Its in our faces, she says.

Howards district covers parts of east and west Austin both sides of the Dual City. And the differences have become increasingly evident to her. The only way to change things, she says, is through political reform, and she hopes the pandemic will be a catalyst for that. She especially wants immigration reform to protect people who were vulnerable even before the pandemic.

These are the people that are there making sure that [the] food supply chain is continuing to function. [These] people allow us to enjoy the lives that we have and to have food on our table, Howard says.

Texas has called them essential. But some of them dont feel that way. One person recently commented on social media that instead of essential, we feel disposable.

Digital story edited by Caroline Covington.

View original post here:
When It Comes To COVID-19, The 'I-35 Divide' Determines Who's More At Risk - KUT

Which of these two famous guys more likely committed the sexual assault he has been accused of?

A) Brett Kavanaugh.

B) Joe Biden.

The answer is obvious, which is why Sleepy Joe has just picked up two very tepid endorsements, one from 78-year-old millionaire socialist Bernie Sanders, and the second from the other half of what Joe calls the OBiden-Bama administration.

On his latest podcast, Sleepy Joe modestly introduced himself:

Well, the uh look um uh you know uh uh with uh the fact is that uh theres a lot going on I dont know where to begin but uh

Thats okay, I know where to begin. Lets start with the charges of Bidens former aide Tara Reade that in 1993 he threw her up against a wall, reached under her dress and grabbed her by her private parts. And then, when she rebuffed him, he said to her, Cmon man, I heard you liked me.

This story broke three weeks ago. Three weeks ago! Yet the New York Times and The Washington Post the Pravda and Izvestia of the Democrat party waited until last weekend to, youll pardon the expression, touch the story.

Until after Bolshevik Bernie dropped out of the race.

The Times initially reported, We found no pattern of sexual misconduct by Biden, beyond hugs, kisses and touching that women previously said made them uncomfortable.

You know, like the female Secret Service agents who said they were forced to watch him swim in the nude when he was vice president. Or the female Nevada state rep who said he wrapped himself around her like an octopus. Or all those photos of him groping gals from 8 to 80

But almost instantly the Times deleted the above sentence, after a demand from the Biden campaign. The Times admitted it caved. Thats what party propaganda sheets do, when the commissar puts his shod foot down.

No surprise here in 2016, at least one Times reporter cleared his fawning Hillary Clinton copy with the campaign. It was all revealed in those Wikileaks emails.

Another one of those leaks indicated that the Democrats were even ghostwriting slobbering Hillary hagiographies for at least one hack at The Washington Post. Which that brings us to the Posts brooming of this latest Biden scandal.

The Post found no other allegations against (Biden) as serious as Reades.

Which is sort of like writing a story about Ted Kennedy and saying, The Post found no other allegations against Kennedy as serious as Mary Jo Kopechnes.

But what more would you expect from two newspapers that awarded themselves Pulitzer Prizes a couple of years ago for their deeply sourced, relentlessly reported coverage of what was, we now know, an utter hoax about the Trump campaign colluding with the Russians, when in reality it was Hillary Clintons campaign playing footsie with the erstwhile Reds.

Maybe the papers had to vet the salacious allegations about their hero, Lunch Bucket Joe. Just like they did with, say, Julie Swetnick.

Remember her she was the very sketchy woman who accused Brett Kavanaugh of once running a teenage rape gang in the Beltway suburbs, even though she was years older than him.

She was the client of one Michael Avenatti, whose Bureau of Prisons number is 86743-054, and who was just temporarily released from the penitentiary hell be residing in for the next decade or so.

During Kavanaughs confirmation hearings, NBC News led its newscast with Swetnicks totally uncorroborated, since-debunked charges.

You see, theres no need to vet any salacious allegations against Republicans. Ready, shoot, aim.

Joe Biden, though, just wants to look ahead, to his presidency:

Were gonna finally achieve comprehensive immigration reform as well as put millions of citizens on a path to citizenship.

Sounds like a plan.

So Im pleased to announce that Bernie and I have agreed to establish six policy working groups, one on the economy, one on education, one on criminal justice, which should be reform not punishment, one on immigration, climate change and the economy.

Could I be on the policy working group on the economy, or, if thats full up, maybe the one on the economy?

Meanwhile, Sleepy Joe is still down in the basement, babbling about something.

But it seems to me that there is this sense that somehow again I keep getting back to this issue and I may be dead wrong about it is that there seems to be this this this this sort of gut feeling that government can never do anything as well as the private sector can do it so the better we let government keep out of this the better off were gonna be. I dont think its just about, at least Im not sure, obviously.

May we quote you on that, Mr. Vice President?

View original post here:
Howie Carr: Confessions of Sleepy Joe Biden and his media enablers - Boston Herald

The devastation wrought by COVID-19 has laid bare just how vulnerable we are when the institutions of American life fail to work. It is one of the great miracles of the American creed that we soldier on no matter the circumstancesthat, for example, health care professionals continue to serve even as resources are scarce. But when this crisis abates and it will we need to fix whats broken across much of American government. And heres one place thats often overlooked: the federal governments executive branch.

When analysts focus on gridlock, dysfunction, or whatever word you choose to describe Washingtons failure to solve problems, they tend to home in on either the one person who sits in the Oval Office or on Congress. As many correctly point out, Democrats and Republicans too frequently scream at each otheror else talk past one another when they should be hammering together bipartisan legislation. Fortunately, the Problem Solvers Caucus, a bloc of 25 Republicans and 25 Democrats working together on a range of issues, is now building a bridge into the Senate.

But governments failures are not exclusively the province of Capitol Hill or the Oval Office. If you drove around Washington (before the era of social distancing) and took stock of the enormous number of federal buildings, you would know that the vast majority arent extensions of Congress, but rather are filled by bureaucrats working in agencies run, in the main, by explicitly political appointeesmen and women who have been selected to fill important positions explicitly because theyve paid heed to one of the two political parties.

The results are predictable. The bureaucracies these political appointees control are often made not to solve problems but to grind political axes. Rather than finding the proper balance between, say, economic growth and environmental protection, bureaucracies charged with writing and enforcing regulations vacillate from one to the other as control of the White House bounces from one party to the other. Rather than trying to find a bipartisan way forward on immigration reform and border protection, agencies leaders pick one over the other.

There are, of course, some protections against the politicization of executive branch bureaucracies. To cut back on the patronage system that empowered 19th century presidents to staff government agencies explicitly through patronage, civil service reforms created a protected class of bureaucrats who remain at government agencies even as the political winds change. But over the last several decades, too many political appointees who control those bureaucracies have largely abandoned the long tradition of acting in the broad public interest, far too often giving in to the impulse to act as partisan functionaries. That needs to change.

Turning this tide will be a big task. Those in power today have no incentive to give up their authority voluntarily. So, while we can work toward this goal during this election year, the ground may not yet be entirely fertile. That said, 2024 is a different story. Leaders in both parties will realize they stand some chance of losing the presidential election, and depending on how this years election evolves, neither party will necessarily have an incumbent advantage. In other words, both parties will have an incentive to embrace the notion that executive branch appointeesfrom Cabinet-level posts all the way down to those working one level above the civil servantsshould be appointed on account of their competence, rather than their fealty to one party or the other. So we need to begin working now to provide the foundation for a truly integrated government.

Some will argue that a bipartisan administration is beyond the palethat the executive branch needs to be the sole property of one party or the other. But in the scheme of incredible things that have happened over the last few years, integrating the executive branch would hardly be among the most radical. This has worked at the state levelMaryland Republican Gov. Larry Hogan, for example, has both Democrats and Republicans serving in his administration.

Fixing Congress may be the first order, and the Problem Solvers are well on their way to building momentum for a solutions-oriented legislature. But we cant lose sight of the rest of government. America can grow strong after this crisis abatesbut only if our leaders ensure that we work to solve problems together. Beyond having a token Cabinet secretary from the other party in any given administration, the president inaugurated in 2025 should lead a government that is balanced between left and right.

Nancy Jacobson is CEO and founder No Labels, a group that seeks to move Washington beyond partisan gridlock and toward solutions to challenges faced by the country.

See more here:
Beyond bipartisanship, we need an integrated government | TheHill - The Hill

In one fell swoop, the COVID-19 pandemic has brought the American economy to its knees and thrown many American workers out of their jobs. More than ten million Americans have lost their jobs in the last month, and St. Louis Federal Reserve President James Bullard estimates that before this is over, unemployment could reach 32 percent thats nearly ten percentage points higher than the 24.9 percent jobless rate the nation suffered during the worst of the Great Depression in 1933.

But many of those workers who are laid off will eventually seek to return to their jobs in the nations small business sector, comprised of some 31 million small businesses across the country. These small companies ones with less than 500 employees range from hairdressers to bookstores, from small factories to restaurants, and last year these companies employed 52 percent of all Americans who work for the private sector. And while Washington is trying to pull a new rabbit out of its hat to keep these entrepreneurs open, many may not be able to survive an extended COVID-19 shutdown.

Despite a potentially bleak future, marked by economic ruin and previously unseen unemployment rates, theres one bad policy choice we can rely on the government to keep on making, albeit on a delayed basis, due to the pandemic. This nation will continue its historically high levels of immigration that are driven largely by chain migration. In 2019 the U.S. admitted:

And those numbers are just new admissions, theydont include extensions of status or changes from one status to another byforeigners already in the United States.

Why would the U.S. continue admitting such anenormous number of immigrants when it knows at least for the short term that its economy will be in shambles and its own citizens will be in desperateneed of work? Because our immigrationsystem operates on autopilot, with congressionally mandated levels for eachcategory. There is very little flexibility built into the system to allow theExecutive Branch to respond to changing economic and political conditionsthroughout the world. Its an outdated, immigration framework that operates ina vacuum, outside of the economic and political realities that affect the livesof everyday Americans.

The current immigration system is dysfunctionalbecause it doesnt address either international economics or geopolitics asthey currently exist. Thankfully, as theSupreme Court affirmed in Trump v. Hawaii,the president has the ability to temporarily close the border to broadcategories of immigrants in times of crisis. However, that power does notpermit our Chief Executive to create new immigration classifications or do awaywith existing ones. America needs an immigration system that is flexible enoughto meet the needs of our ever-changing economy.

And ifever there was a time to enact real immigration reform, it is now. Congressneeds to stop forcing American workers to compete with foreigner workers forgood jobs. It is time to make immigration policy work for Americans.

Visit link:
This Isnt What Immigration in the National Interest Looks Like - ImmigrationReform.com

Those residing in the U.S. illegally were granted protections under then-President Barack Obamas Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program are estimated to number between 600- to 800-thousand.

President Trump, who won the 2016 presidential election with support from immigration hardliners. The president has demonstrated a willingness in the pastto work with Congress on a long-term solution for these individuals; that is, those whose legal status in America is currently in limbo.

Since its expiration, the question of how to deal with the so-called "Dreamers" post DACA has been a matter of contention down party lines and more recently has effectively been relegated to the back burner as the Coronavirus pandemic dominatesthe news-cycle.

But with an increasing number of countries shutting down their borders in an effort to contain COVID-19, immigration policy and border security including finding a permanent solution to the longstanding DACA saga certainly requires a higher level of priority from a distracted Congress.

Many legislators on the left, who far too often play the "race card" in accusing President Trump of "xenophobia," while unfairly and inaccurately portraying as him having anti-immigrant views, fail to point out that he has actually already shown support for proposals that would grant legalization and a possibly even a path to citizenship for Dreamers.

In fact, in January of 2018, the White House unveiled a proposal that would have provided a pathway to citizenship for a whopping 1.8 million illegal residents (2 to 3 times the number of Dreamers) living in the U.S., in exchange for additional restrictions on legal immigration, and $25 billion for improved border security.

The plan was blasted by many conservative activists as "amnesty."

It was also slammed by many Democrats for its price tag, but it had the potential to be a long-term win-win for both parties; conservatives would have gotten the "big beautiful wall," the have long craved.

Liberals could have hit the campaign trail for many elections to come touting their major victory that made the American dream possible for almost 2 million new residents.

With America suffering through what is, and what will remain for a period, a difficult downturn in the economy, some Americans may not be as interested in the fate of the Dreamers. Yet,an incredible opportunity now exists to help restart the economy and solve border security as part of this conundrum, with some slight modifications to the so-called Phase 4 recovery package President Trump has recently been talked up.

As we watch Congress so easily spend trillions of dollars at a record pace, it seems silly to think that the historic 2018-2019 government shutdown occurred due to a dispute over what amounted to less than one-tenth of 1% of the total federal budget.

That was unacceptable.

One thing that all Americans should be learning during the COVID-19 pandemic is the importance of border security, and that political arguments over small sums of money should never compromise national security.

Although President Trump offered a "path to citizenship" for up to 1.8 million illegal residents, I think that number is far too liberal and also think Trump could potentially pacify legislators on both sides with legalization for up to 1 million illegal residents.

The president has the undivided attention of the American people right now.

He can work up public support for this kind of legislation via his daily White House Coronavirus Task Force briefings.

Regardless of how you may feel about the Dreamers, the 600- to 800-thousand individuals currently falling under such a designation were educated and trained to have the ability to contribute to our society and workforce at the expense of the American taxpayer.

Americans have already made this investment, thus, there is really no good argument for deporting them at this juncture.

The extra 200 to 400 thousand can be legalized via a merit lottery, where applicants can apply for legalization based on their special skillset or possible contribution to the country, and be considered to possibly stay in the Unitedd States.

I would additionally propose a merit-based immigration only going forward.

America has been inundated with unskilled South and Central American labor for decades.

This only continues to drive down wages as well as overextend our entitlement system.

I would also offer, that going forward, America should only allow skilled laborers in undermanned fields, particularly in STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics), to receive temporary work permits and also potentially garner a possible long-term path to citizenship.

Investment-centered citizenship should also be prioritized for those looking to immediately invest in America's private sector.

These remedies, in addition to an increase in ICE agents and other border-centered manpower, will finally solve America's long-standing illegal immigration issue.

Whether legislators, who seem to prioritize bickering and political posturing over minute details and minute sums of money (proportionally) can work this one out remains to be seen.

Julio Rivera is a small business consultant, political activist, writer and Editorial Director for Reactionary Times. He has been a regular contributor to Newsmax TV and columnist for Newsmax.com since 2016. His writing, which is concentrated on politics, cybersecurity and sports, has also been published by websites including The Hill, The Washington Times, LifeZette, The Washington Examiner, American Thinker, The Toronto Sun and PJ Media and many others. For more of his reports, Go Here Now.

2020 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Excerpt from:
Immigration Reform Bogged Down in Budgetary Minutiae - Newsmax