Connect with us

West

California Dem bill will allow non-citizens to become police officers

Published

on

NEWNow you can hearken to Fox Information articles!

A brand new California invoice will enable non-citizens to turn out to be cops within the state. 

“Current legislation, with sure exceptions, prohibits an individual who will not be a citizen of america from being appointed as a member of the California Freeway Patrol. This invoice would take away that prohibition, and would make conforming modifications,” the invoice states. 

SB 960, proposed by Democrat Sen. Nancy Skinner, would take away the availability that a person have to be a citizen or everlasting resident of america so as to turn out to be a police officer. The invoice makes no distinction between authorized and unlawful immigrants. 

TEXAS BORDER RESIDENTS FED UP AS MIGRANT INFLUX WORSENS: ‘WE DON’T KNOW’ WHO’S COMING IN

Advertisement

The invoice was beforehand voted on on the finish of March, with 4 ayes and one no. Democratic Sens. Steven Bradford, Sydney Kamlager and Scott Wiener, together with Skinner, all voted in favor of the invoice. Sen. Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh, a Republican, voted no.

The invoice solely permits for authorized immigrants to turn out to be cops, a supply accustomed to the invoice informed Fox Information Digital. Nevertheless, the language within the invoice itself doesn’t specify that unlawful immigrants are barred from doing so. The time period “unlawful immigrant” was pointless to incorporate as different sections of federal legislation already barred unlawful immigrants from turning into officers, the supply continued.

“This invoice solely permits those that live right here legally and have the authorized capability to work right here — by means of a visa, a inexperienced card — to turn out to be peace officers. I simply need to be clear on that,” mentioned Sen. Skinner at a March 22 Senate Public Security Committee.

The invoice acquired its second studying on Tuesday and is now onto its third studying. 

State Sen. Nancy Skinner talks with Sen. Joel Anderson in the course of the Senate session in Sacramento, California, on Aug. 28, 2018.
(AP Picture/Wealthy Pedroncelli)

Advertisement

This comes on the heels of the Biden administration’s announcement to elevate the Title 42 well being coverage regardless of migrant surge issues. 

“After contemplating present public well being situations and an elevated availability of instruments to struggle COVID-19 (equivalent to extremely efficient vaccines and therapeutics), the CDC Director has decided that an Order suspending the correct to introduce migrants into america is now not crucial,” the Facilities for Illness Management mentioned in a press release.

ARIZONA BORDER SECTOR SEES 579% SPIKE IN MIGRANT ENCOUNTERS OVER LAST FISCAL YEAR AS CRISIS WORSENS

Title 42 was carried out in March 2020 in the course of the Trump administration as a method of expelling unlawful immigrants in the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. 

President Joe Biden delivers remarks on the debt ceiling at the White House on Oct. 4, 2021.

President Joe Biden delivers remarks on the debt ceiling on the White Home on Oct. 4, 2021.
(AP Picture/Evan Vucci)

Advertisement

Regardless of Democratic help to drop Title 42, each average Democratic and Republican lawmakers have expressed concern for the doable migrant surge that would end result. Former Trump White Home adviser Stephen Miller mentioned it will “open the floodgates on a biblical scale.” 

Learn the complete article from Here

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Utah

Here’s what Utahns need to make to afford a modest two-bedroom apartment

Published

on

Here’s what Utahns need to make to afford a modest two-bedroom apartment


This story is part of The Salt Lake Tribune’s ongoing commitment to identify solutions to Utah’s biggest challenges through the work of the Innovation Lab. [Subscribe to our newsletter here.]

Renters in most Utah counties likely don’t make enough to afford a modest, two-bedroom apartment, according to new data.

The “Out of Reach 2024″ report was released recently the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the National Low Income Housing Coalition. The report uses HUD’s fair-market rent calculations to determine the housing wage — how much a full-time worker must earn to afford a modest rental home without spending more than 30% of their income on housing — for states, counties and metropolitan areas across the country.

The report found that “more renters than ever before are paying more than they can afford on rent,” and risk homelessness, said Diane Yentel, who heads the coalition.

Advertisement

That includes Utah, where the mean wage for renters was lower than the housing wage in all but four counties, and was within 50 cents of it in another two. All six are rural counties.

Renters in Utah can’t afford to buy a home in all but one county, according to a recent analysis by The Salt Lake Tribune of U.S. Census Bureau and real-estate industry data. And based on a Tribune analysis of the new report, they can’t afford to rent in most counties, either.

The coalition’s analysis found Utah’s statewide housing wage — what a person would have to earn to be able to afford a two-bedroom apartment at fair-market rent — is $26.89 an hour.

That cost varies from $17.40 an hour in several rural counties to $30.88 in Salt Lake County, and a maximum of $34.75 in Summit County. There is data available for every county in Utah except Daggett County.

Meanwhile, the mean renter wage is lower statewide and in nearly every county than the housing wage — sometimes by double-digit numbers.

Advertisement

It’s only higher in Duchesne, Garfield, San Juan and Wayne counties, all rural counties in eastern or southeastern Utah.

Mean renter wages also are lower but within 50 cents an hour in two other counties — Box Elder County in the northwestern part of the state and Uintah County in eastern Utah. That gap is small enough that the NLIHC determined a renter could work one job and still afford a modest, two-bedroom apartment.

In other counties, the gap between the typical renter and housing wages varies from 87 cents in Beaver County to $15.64 in Kane County and averages about $7 an hour (more than $14,500 a year).

There is more affordability for one-bedroom apartments, but the mean renter wage is still short in 18 counties, including Cache, Davis, Grand, Iron, Kane, Salt Lake, Tooele, Washington and Weber.

The gap matters because even in “an improving economic landscape,” renters continue to struggle, Yentel said, and that leads to more evictions and higher rates of homelessness.

Advertisement

There is, however, some good news for Utah renters.

For one, the state’s housing wage is about in the middle compared to other states.

Utah’s housing wage also is lower than neighboring Arizona, Colorado and Nevada, as well as other western states like California, Oregon and Washington. Utah’s northern neighbors have housing wages somewhat lower than Utah’s — Idaho’s is about $4 lower, and Wyoming’s is about $8 lower.

And though there are new and luxury rentals across the state that cost much more than the fair-market rent HUD set, one analysis found typical rents for one-bedroom and two-bedroom apartments are lower.

Median rent along the Wasatch Front is between $77 and $166 a month less than fair-market rent for two-bedroom apartments, according to data from ApartmentList.com.

Advertisement

And median rent is only higher than fair-market in Davis County by $8, the ApartmentList data shows — it is lower in Salt Lake, Utah and Weber counties by at least $80.

Utah has focused on ways to improve the state’s housing crisis, but most have focused on homeownership.

As part of the Out of Reach report, the coalition suggested solutions for the rental side, though they are actions the federal government is advised to take. The coalition has recommended:

  • Long-term federal investments in affordable housing, including rental assistance.

  • Construction of deeply affordable housing.

  • Preservation of existing affordable housing.

  • Stronger renter protections.

Megan Banta is The Salt Lake Tribune’s data enterprise reporter, a philanthropically supported position. The Tribune retains control over all editorial decisions.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Washington

Analysis | A shift in how Democrats talk about Biden’s dropping out

Published

on

Analysis | A shift in how Democrats talk about Biden’s dropping out


No elected Democrats (besides Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Texas) want to be the ones to tell President Biden that he should step aside after Thursday’s debate. Biden’s campaign insists it’s not even on the table.

“You’ve heard this in his own words,” spokeswoman Adrienne Elrod said Wednesday morning on MSNBC. “He is not considering [it].”

But increasingly, what top Democrats appear to be saying is: Maybe he should.

The shift in tone is subtle, but it’s telling. These Democrats have increasingly treated this as a real possibility in ways you avoid if the name of the game is to batten down the hatches and stand by your man. And this is not coming from pundits, editorial boards or backbenchers; it’s coming from party graybeards and potential leaders.

Advertisement

In the aftermath of Thursday’s debate performance from Biden, former House speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) defended him. “We see Joe Biden up close; we know how attuned he is to the issues, how informed he is,” she said Sunday on CNN. She added: “It was a bad night. Let’s move on from that.”

But on Tuesday, Pelosi called it a “legitimate question to say is [Biden’s debate performance] an episode or is this a condition” — saying the same of Donald Trump, for good measure — and suggested this was a conversation Democrats needed to have.

“This is not a normal election where you want to win — if you don’t, you cooperate and do the best you can for the country and hope to win the next time,” Pelosi said on MSNBC. “This is something that is undermining our democracy. [Trump] must be stopped. He cannot be president. Therefore, people are very concerned.”

Pelosi added: “It’s going to be up to Joe Biden to do what he thinks is — there’s no more patriotic person in our country than this president of the United States. Nobody less than the former president. But Joe Biden — and so I trust his judgment.”

Rep. James E. Clyburn (R-S.C.), who until recently served as the No. 3 House Democratic leader, went even further in entertaining the scenario.

“Now, Joe Biden may decide otherwise [and drop out],” Clyburn said on MSNBC. “But I think the people that I’ve been around the last three days are dug in, in their support for Joe Biden.”

Clyburn even added that, should Biden drop out, the party should go with Vice President Harris as its replacement.

“I will support her if he were to step aside,” Clyburn said, while emphasizing he wants a Biden-Harris ticket. He added: “No, this party should not, in any way, do anything to work around Miss Harris. We should do everything we can to bolster her, whether she’s in second place or at the top of the ticket.”

Advertisement

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear (D), one of those speculated on as a possible replacement, went on CNN on Tuesday night and also treated this as an open question.

“Well, Joe Biden is our nominee, and ultimately that decision on continuing or not will fall to him and his family,” Beshear said. “But I don’t think that there’s anything wrong with asking the president to talk to the American people a little bit more about his health or that debate performance.”

Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D), another talked-about presidential contender, also seemed to choose his words carefully Tuesday night on CNN.

“Look, right now, Joe Biden is our nominee,” Pritzker said. “And I’m 100 percent on board with supporting him as our nominee, unless he makes some other decision. And then I think we’re all going to be discussing what’s the best way forward.”

Pritzker even entertained alternatives like Harris, asserting that they could have broad appeal.

Advertisement

“I know there are people in the party that want people to just be quiet,” he said. “But the truth is I think people need to express themselves. We’re a party that accepts that. And I’m pleased about that. And then, we’ll come to a conclusion here. Joe Biden will come to a conclusion about it.”

He added: “Right now, unless he makes some other decision, discussing what’s the best way forward, Joe Biden will come to a conclusion about it.”

These are not the kinds of things you say if this isn’t something you want Biden to at least think about. And they are a marked contrast to the Biden campaign’s line that this just isn’t a consideration at all.

These Democrats are careful to caveat their comments by citing Trump and saying they stand by and support Biden if he stays. But these experienced politicians know those comments will only feed questions about whether Biden can or should continue. You don’t entertain those questions unless you think it’s a vital conversation, because the conversation itself could damage Biden by elevating these concerns.

At least for now, they’re keeping that conversation going. And the Biden campaign’s efforts to tamp it down aren’t working.

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

Wyoming

It's Unconstitutional: Hemp Businesses Sue Wyoming Governor Over Law Banning Delta-8 And Similar Substances

Published

on

It's Unconstitutional: Hemp Businesses Sue Wyoming Governor Over Law Banning Delta-8 And Similar Substances


Ten hemp companies and one individual hemp seller are suing the state of Wyoming over a ban on the cannabis-like substance delta-8 THC. They are calling the law, which took effect Monday, unconstitutional and want it blocked.

The lawsuit was filed last Friday in the U.S. District Court against Wyoming Gov.Mark Gordon (R), attorney general Bridget Hill (R), director of agriculture Doug Miyamoto and all of Wyoming’s elected prosecutors.

Advertisement

“We will fight to keep our small businesses open, keep food on the tables of our staff, and keep products coming to the hardworking people [of] Wyoming,” Gillette’s Mountain High Wellness store owners Sarah and Richard McDaniel, who are among the plaintiffs, said in a statement as reported by WyoFile. “The Hemp Community of Wyoming is not backing down until the people of Wyoming have the right to decide what we use for alternative options to big pharma and our small businesses have the right to continue to operate.”

Read Also: Intoxicating Hemp Products Face Regulatory Crackdown Across Multiple States

Advertisement

The Delta-8 Question

What is delta-8 THC and why is it banned?

Delta-8 THC is a chemical component of the cannabis plant. Although delta-8 occurs naturally in very small concentrations, it can produce a mild psychoactive effect in some people similar to delta-9 THC.

Advertisement

New industrial methodologies enable delta-8 THC to be converted from CBD derived from hemp. Products developed as a result of the 2018 federal Farm Bill that legalized hemp are therefore not subject to the same testing requirements as cannabis, creating a legal loophole.

The biggest problem connected to delta-8 THC has mostly to do with the question of safety. It takes a proficient and experienced chemist to ensure the safe conversion of CBD molecules into THC molecules, writes Forbes. Inappropriate or imprecise techniques could potentially result in dangerous impurities in the final product.

This is why many states are banning delta-8 and other synthetic cannabis products.

Advertisement

“(The new law) creates insurmountable confusion around criminal liability and destroys the mere act of processing hemp into consumable products,” reads the lawsuit. “(We) face irreparable harm unless this court enjoins (the law).

Unconstitutional And Too Broad

Advertisement

The plaintiffs also claim that the new ban illegally narrows the federal definition of hemp, impacts interstate transpiration laws, and is too broad.

“For instance, [Senate File 32 – Hemp-limitations on psychoactive substances] bans hemp containing any “synthetic substance,” a term which is overly broad that incorporates “non ‘psychoactive substances’” like CBD that contains no THC,” the filing states. 

The lawsuit lists the following businesses as plaintiffs: Up In Smoke II (Laramie), Capitol Botanicals (Cody), Dr. Chronic’s Concentrates (Casper), Flower Castle Elevated Wellness (Cheyenne), and CinD’s CBD and Vape (Torrington). It also includes the agricultural operation Greybull River Farms.

Advertisement

The new law is “unconstitutional, as it deprived plaintiffs from cultivating, distributing, transporting and selling hemp plants and hemp-derived products that are declared legal under the 2018 Farm Bill,” reads the document. The plaintiffs also say if the law is enacted and individuals who cultivate hemp plants are to be prosecuted they’ll suffer “irreparable harm.”

“An injunction is the proper remedy when challenging the constitutionality of state action.”

Advertisement

Read Next:

To keep on top of what is happening with cannabis and hemp in the U.S., join us at the 19th Benzinga Cannabis Capital Conference, which is coming to Chicago this Oct. 8-9. Get your tickets now before prices go up by following this link.

Photo: Courtesy of H_Ko via Shutterstock

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending