404 lines
64 KiB
HTML
404 lines
64 KiB
HTML
|
<!DOCTYPE html>
|
|||
|
|
<html lang="" xml:lang="" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><head>
|
|||
|
|
<meta charset="utf-8"/>
|
|||
|
|
<meta content="pandoc" name="generator"/>
|
|||
|
|
<meta content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, user-scalable=yes" name="viewport"/>
|
|||
|
|
<title>23 September, 2023</title>
|
|||
|
|
<style>
|
|||
|
|
code{white-space: pre-wrap;}
|
|||
|
|
span.smallcaps{font-variant: small-caps;}
|
|||
|
|
span.underline{text-decoration: underline;}
|
|||
|
|
div.column{display: inline-block; vertical-align: top; width: 50%;}
|
|||
|
|
div.hanging-indent{margin-left: 1.5em; text-indent: -1.5em;}
|
|||
|
|
ul.task-list{list-style: none;}
|
|||
|
|
</style>
|
|||
|
|
<title>Daily-Dose</title><meta content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0" name="viewport"/><link href="styles/simple.css" rel="stylesheet"/><link href="../styles/simple.css" rel="stylesheet"/><style>*{overflow-x:hidden;}</style><link href="https://unpkg.com/aos@2.3.1/dist/aos.css" rel="stylesheet"/><script src="https://unpkg.com/aos@2.3.1/dist/aos.js"></script></head>
|
|||
|
|
<body>
|
|||
|
|
<h1 data-aos="fade-down" id="daily-dose">Daily-Dose</h1>
|
|||
|
|
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" data-aos-anchor-placement="top-bottom" id="contents">Contents</h1>
|
|||
|
|
<ul>
|
|||
|
|
<li><a href="#from-new-yorker">From New Yorker</a></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><a href="#from-vox">From Vox</a></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><a href="#from-the-hindu-sports">From The Hindu: Sports</a></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><a href="#from-the-hindu-national-news">From The Hindu: National News</a></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><a href="#from-bbc-europe">From BBC: Europe</a></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><a href="#from-ars-technica">From Ars Technica</a></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><a href="#from-jokes-subreddit">From Jokes Subreddit</a></li>
|
|||
|
|
</ul>
|
|||
|
|
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-new-yorker">From New Yorker</h1>
|
|||
|
|
<ul>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>The Biden Administration’s Next Big Climate Decision</strong> - The liquefied-natural-gas buildout—and fossil-fuel exports—challenge progress on global warming. - <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-biden-administrations-next-big-climate-decision">link</a></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Rupert Murdoch Takes a Step Back—Not Away</strong> - Although the media mogul announced that his son Lachlan will become the chair of News Corp. and Fox Corp., he was also careful to quash speculation that he would be retiring. - <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/rupert-murdoch-takes-a-step-back-not-away">link</a></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>House Republicans Refuse to Host Zelensky Because They’re Too Busy Fighting One Another</strong> - Reflections on a day of self-parody on Capitol Hill. - <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-bidens-washington/house-republicans-refuse-to-host-zelensky-because-theyre-too-busy-fighting-one-another">link</a></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>The Last Gun I Shot</strong> - As a Texan, as an American, I believed that I wouldn’t be able to understand where I lived unless I wrapped my head around the guns themselves. - <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-weekend-essay/the-last-gun-i-shot">link</a></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Kelly Clarkson on “Chemistry,” Her Divorce Record</strong> - The singer tells the staff writer Hanif Abdurraqib about chronicling the end of a marriage in real time. Plus, the novelist Hernan Diaz, and Robert Samuels on figure skating. - <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/podcast/the-new-yorker-radio-hour/kelly-clarkson-on-chemistry-her-divorce-record">link</a></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
</ul>
|
|||
|
|
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-vox">From Vox</h1>
|
|||
|
|
<ul>
|
|||
|
|
<li><strong>Your AI personal assistant is almost here — assuming you actually want it</strong> -
|
|||
|
|
<figure>
|
|||
|
|
<img alt="Sissie Hsiao, a vice president at Google and general manager for Google Assistant’s business unit, speaks onstage during the Google I/O keynote session in May 2023." src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/o6hDngpSA0wVafAuqO1C005TZo0=/501x0:5446x3709/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/72680066/GettyImages_1253646800.0.jpg"/>
|
|||
|
|
<figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
Google’s Bard is just one of several generative AI assistants these days. | Josh Edelson/AFP via Getty Images
|
|||
|
|
</figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
</figure>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
Google, Amazon, and Microsoft have a vision for generative AI. Will it work?
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="5sPGme">
|
|||
|
|
We got a trio of generative AI announcements from three Big Tech companies this week. Google said on Tuesday that it is <a href="https://www.vox.com/technology/2023/9/19/23879526/google-bard-microsoft-openai-new-features">extending Bard</a> to several of its apps, including Gmail and Docs. The next day, Amazon <a href="https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/devices/amazon-alexa-generative-ai">revealed</a> that it will let you have “near-human-like conversations” with Alexa “soon.” On Thursday, Microsoft <a href="https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2023/09/21/announcing-microsoft-copilot-your-everyday-ai-companion/">held an event</a> to announce that it plans to embed its generative AI assistant, “Copilot,” across many of its products.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="oNid8a">
|
|||
|
|
The products and services are different, but the idea the companies behind them are selling is the same: Generative AI is amazing and our generative AI tools are amazing, so we’re going to embed them in as many of our services as possible to make your life amazing. Or, as Colette Stallbaumer, general manager of Microsoft 365 said at the company’s Thursday event: “Soon, you won’t be able to imagine your life without it.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="JLzTgt">
|
|||
|
|
You just have to imagine your life <em>with</em> it first because it’s not here yet. And then you have to wonder if people will really use these tools when they do roll out. This isn’t the first time tech companies have gone big on intelligent assistants, only for the public to either hate them or be largely indifferent to them. We can go back to the late ’90s with <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/06/clippy-the-microsoft-office-assistant-is-the-patriarchys-fault/396653/">Clippy</a>, Microsoft’s notoriously much-loathed Office assistant. More recently, we’ve gotten <a href="https://www.vox.com/2017/5/17/15655458/digital-assistants-voice-activated-operating-systems-alexa-siri-cortana-ios">smart assistants</a> like Alexa, Apple’s Siri, Google’s Google Assistant, and Microsoft’s Cortana. It’s safe to say that those haven’t gotten the kind of adoption their makers hoped for, both in <a href="https://www.popsci.com/technology/amazon-alexa-lose-money">how many people</a> are using them and <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2021/12/23/22851451/amazon-alexa-by-the-way-use-case-functionality-plateaued">how many things</a> they’re using them for. Microsoft gave up on Cortana-powered smart speakers <a href="https://www.cnet.com/home/smart-home/only-cortana-powered-speaker-is-about-to-drop-microsofts-digital-assistant/">long ago</a> and will soon <a href="https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/end-of-support-for-cortana-d025b39f-ee5b-4836-a954-0ab646ee1efa">stop supporting it</a> just in time for its generative AI tools to take over. Amazon, on the other hand, is resting its hopes for Alexa on <a href="https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/devices/amazon-alexa-generative-ai">generative AI</a>, which it calls its “north star.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="FMA3uK">
|
|||
|
|
It doesn’t help tech companies’ case that these next-generation assistants we’re supposed to use for everything have already had some <a href="https://www.newscientist.com/article/2358426-google-bard-advert-shows-new-ai-search-tool-making-a-factual-error/">high</a>-<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/16/technology/bing-chatbot-microsoft-chatgpt.html">profile</a> <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/16/technology/bing-chatbot-microsoft-chatgpt.html">flubs</a>. That makes it hard to trust both what these chatbots tell us and that they’ll be able to do what their developers claim anytime soon. Older digital assistants were far from perfect, but the stakes were a lot lower. There are real consequences when chatbots fall short. Alexa playing “Desperado” when you asked it to play “Despacito” is annoying. ChatGPT inserting a bunch of false information that it insists is correct into an important work document could <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/08/nyregion/lawyer-chatgpt-sanctions.html">get you (and potentially many others) in a lot of trouble</a>.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="yNB453">
|
|||
|
|
Yet Microsoft continues to push especially hard on this vision of a generative AI-fueled personal assistant that knows you and helps you across your digital life (it also appears to be the furthest along in developing it, not to mention that <a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/2023/1/23/23567991/microsoft-open-ai-investment-chatgpt">$13 billion partnership</a> with OpenAI, the hottest generative AI company out there right now). The company’s internet search announcement <a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/2023/2/7/23590069/bing-openai-microsoft-google-bard">back in February</a> was a big deal, and it likely spurred Google to roll out its internet search “experiment,” Bard, <a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/2023/2/6/23588308/google-bard-chatbot-chatgpt-ai-testing-public">shortly afterward</a>. If Microsoft hadn’t jumped first, Google may well have continued to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/20/technology/google-chatgpt-artificial-intelligence.html">take its time</a> perfecting Bard before releasing it. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella even took a swipe at Google at Thursday’s event, saying, “We are striving to breathe some innovation and life” into a “market that’s dominated by one player.” He didn’t call out Google by name, but the company is <a href="https://www.vox.com/technology/2023/9/11/23864514/google-search-antitrust-trial">currently on trial</a> over its dominance of the search market. And also: Duh.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="8I3m0s">
|
|||
|
|
After all that, most people still aren’t using Bing, which saw only a tiny bump in usage after it got its supposedly revolutionary chatbot. Bard doesn’t seem to have generated much interest either, although Google hasn’t played it up the way Microsoft has for Bing. Neither company releases much data on how many people are using these new products, but the stats we do have suggest it’s <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/chatgpt-ai-adoption-slow-google-bard-morgan-stanley-2023-6?r=US&IR=T">not very</a> many. Interest in consumer-facing generative AI seems to have <a href="https://www.vox.com/technology/2023/8/19/23837705/openai-chatgpt-microsoft-bing-google-generating-less-interest">fallen off</a> after the late 2022 and early 2023 burst of excitement when they first released.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="3FAebU">
|
|||
|
|
Some of this is to be expected. Buzz and curiosity tend to be short-lived. But some of it is likely due to people not finding much use for AI chatbot internet search in their daily lives. The fact that ChatGPT usage went down in the summer and <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-09-20/chatgpt-usage-is-rising-again-as-students-return-to-school?srnd=undefined">is going back up again in the fall</a> indicates that a lot of its use is from students, who may well be using it to do their homework and write essays for them rather than learn information that allows them to do that homework and write those essays themselves.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="fFNqZt">
|
|||
|
|
So now companies have turned their attention toward using generative AI to assist us well beyond searching the internet, which was probably their goal all along anyway. Google and Microsoft do a great job of playing up their products’ strengths and how much better their AI tools will work once they’re in and working across everything, rather than siloed within each app or service. In theory, they’ll be able to combine their tremendous libraries of preexisting data and knowledge with the data and knowledge they have about their users, giving us humans a personalized, efficient assistant that vastly improves our work and personal lives. The possibilities are endless, everything works seamlessly, and we’ll all be able to focus our time and energy on more important things. There’s a reason Microsoft calls its assistant Copilot and uses words like “companion” when describing what it will do, and be, for you.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="qIS6Tc">
|
|||
|
|
The reality is that we aren’t there yet. Some of Microsoft’s AI tools won’t be here until next year, and there is no date for when Microsoft’s ultimate vision, the ability to use Copilot across all of its products, will be realized. As for what we have now, you still have to check (or you really should check) everything chatbots do and tell you for accuracy. That will only be more important if and when people integrate them into really important parts of their lives. Google just rolled out a new tool so users <a href="https://www.vox.com/technology/2023/9/19/23879526/google-bard-microsoft-openai-new-features">can do just that</a>. That’s helpful, but it’s also an admission — and Google continues to call Bard an “experiment,” further reinforcing the idea that this is something to try out but not fully rely on.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="fEqVzF">
|
|||
|
|
You can see the new wave of generative AI assistants as an example of progress, with tech companies making ever-better digital assistants that are sure to catch on once they’re good enough. You might also see it as tech companies trying to push something on people that they just don’t want or need in an effort to capture as many parts of their lives as possible. So far, it’s mostly been the latter. But maybe Copilot will be the Clippy Microsoft always knew we wanted.
|
|||
|
|
</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><strong>A new Supreme Court case could trigger a second Great Depression</strong> -
|
|||
|
|
<figure>
|
|||
|
|
<img alt="" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/p79PxCx85pFYOXGRcdLKYMJnYvo=/0x81:4838x3710/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/72679942/107692038.0.jpg"/>
|
|||
|
|
<figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
Unemployed men eating soup and bread at Bernarr Macfadden’s Penny Cafeteria, probably in Washington DC, circa 1935. | Keystone View Company/Archive Photos/Getty Images
|
|||
|
|
</figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
</figure>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
America’s Trumpiest court handed down a shockingly dangerous decision. The Supreme Court is likely, but not certain, to fix it.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="uRpOeD">
|
|||
|
|
The plaintiffs’ arguments in <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-v-community-financial-services-association-of-america-limited/"><em>Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial Services Association</em></a>, which the justices will hear on October 3, are simultaneously some of the silliest and some of the most dangerous ideas ever presented to the Supreme Court of the United States.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="5lbryb">
|
|||
|
|
They claim that an entire federal agency, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), is unconstitutional. And they do so based on an interpretation of the Constitution that would invalidate Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, and countless other federal programs. As the Justice Department notes in one of its briefs, the 2022 legislation funding the federal government <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-448/274470/20230802113142512_22-448rbUnitedStates.pdf">contains more than 400 provisions</a> that are invalid under these plaintiffs’ reading of the Constitution.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="8lOoba">
|
|||
|
|
Perhaps recognizing that the justices are unlikely to declare the majority of all federal spending unconstitutional, the <em>Community Financial </em>plaintiffs then <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-448/270281/20230703105533891_22-448%20CFSA%20Brief%20for%20Respondents.pdf">spend much of their brief</a> suggesting arbitrary limits the Court could place on these plaintiffs’ already arbitrary interpretation of the Constitution. Without citing any legal authorities, for example, the <em>Consumer Financial </em>plaintiffs claim that Social Security might be excepted from the new legal regime so long as Congress is careful about how it pays for the Social Security Administration’s staff.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="MJz5Dw">
|
|||
|
|
But even with these completely fabricated limits to their completely fabricated reading of the Constitution in place, the <em>Consumer Financial</em> plaintiffs — who are represented by former Trump Solicitor General Noel Francisco — would still do unimaginable harm to the United States of America.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="LnwkED">
|
|||
|
|
As a <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-448/266839/20230515120807734_230503a%20Amici%20Curiae%20Brief.pdf">brief filed by the banking industry</a> explains to the justices, if the Supreme Court agrees with Francisco’s claim that the CFPB is unconstitutional, the entire US mortgage market could seize up, as banks will have no idea what rules they need to comply with in order to issue loans. Moreover, because home building, home sales, and other industries that depend on the mortgage market make up about 17 percent of the US economy, a decision invalidating the CFPB could trigger economic devastation unheard of since the Great Depression.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Czxkkb">
|
|||
|
|
Which brings us to the single most outrageous fact about the <em>Consumer Financial </em>case: A three-judge panel of the <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2022/12/27/23496264/supreme-court-fifth-circuit-trump-court-immigration-housing-sexual-harrassment">far-right</a> United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2022/10/20/23414311/cfpb-unconstitutional-fifth-circuit-supreme-court-trump-community-financial">agreed with the claim that the entire CFPB must be struck down</a>.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="7lqLks">
|
|||
|
|
Let’s be clear: It is very unlikely that five or more justices will sign onto this nonsense. This isn’t even the first time that a bunch of rogue judges on the Fifth Circuit handed down an opinion that threatened to trigger an economic depression. Seven Fifth Circuit judges <a href="https://www.vox.com/22106497/supreme-court-collins-mnuchin-124-billion-fannie-mae-freddie-mac-unitary-executive-housing">did so in a case known as <em>Collins v. Yellen</em></a>, and, in 2021, the Supreme Court rejected those judges’ arguments in an <a href="https://www.vox.com/2021/6/24/22547545/supreme-court-collins-yellen-124-billion-housing-unitary-executive-samuel-alito-neil-gorsuch">8-1 decision</a>.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="dbhmY4">
|
|||
|
|
Nevertheless, <em>Consumer Financial</em> reveals just how deeply delusional thinking has penetrated into the post-Trump federal judiciary. The plaintiffs’ arguments in <em>Consumer Financial </em>have no basis in law, in constitutional text, in precedent, or in rational thought. And they risk the sort of economic catastrophe that the United States hasn’t experienced for nearly a century.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="RkStgx">
|
|||
|
|
And yet a federal appeals court bought these arguments. So now it’s up to the Supreme Court to save the United States from calamity.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<h3 id="Mgmol2">
|
|||
|
|
So, what, exactly, are the <em>Consumer Financial</em> plaintiffs’ arguments?
|
|||
|
|
</h3>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="dCBy0D">
|
|||
|
|
This case turns on a provision of the Constitution which provides that “<a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-9/clause-7/appropriations-clause">No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.</a>” As the Supreme Court said in <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/301/308/"><em>Cincinnati Soap Co. v. United States</em></a><em> </em>(1937), this provision “means simply that no money can be paid out of the Treasury unless it has been appropriated by an act of Congress.” That is, before the federal government spends any money, Congress must pass a law permitting it to do so.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="QyQja6">
|
|||
|
|
The <em>Consumer Financial </em>plaintiffs claim that the CFPB is invalid because it was not properly funded by an act of Congress. But Congress did pass a law, the <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/dodd-frank_title_x_-_bureau_of_consumer_financial_protection">Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010</a>, which funds the CFPB — and, again, the only limit that the Constitution’s Appropriations Clause places on federal spending is that it must be done pursuant to a federal law.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="ZKYLAs">
|
|||
|
|
Significantly, as the DOJ notes in its brief, before the Fifth Circuit’s decision in this very case, “<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-448/266373/20230508190055738_22-448tsUnitedStates.pdf">no court has ever held that an Act of Congress violated the Appropriations Clause</a>.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="XBtaE6">
|
|||
|
|
Nevertheless, the Fifth Circuit declared the agency unconstitutional. Much of the Fifth Circuit’s decision rests on the fact that, while Congress did pass a law funding the CFPB, the specific funding mechanism laid out in this law is unusual. Rather than passing a law giving CFPB a lump sum that it can use to fund its operations for a set period of time — as Congress does with some but not all federal agencies — Congress instead provided that the Federal Reserve shall <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/12/5497">transfer up to 12 percent of its “total operating expenses”</a> to the CFPB each year, upon the CFPB’s request.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Ha4jU7">
|
|||
|
|
This amount is also capped. In 2022, Congress capped CFPB’s funding at $734 million (although the CFPB actually took less than it was allowed to under this cap). This $734 million figure <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-448/274470/20230802113142512_22-448rbUnitedStates.pdf">amounts to about 0.01 percent of the total federal budget</a>.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="JnY93Z">
|
|||
|
|
Again, this funding mechanism, where the CFPB’s operating budget first passes through the Federal Reserve before being allocated to the CFPB, is unusual. But laws do not magically become unconstitutional just because they are atypical. Under the Appropriations Clause, Congress may fund a federal agency however it chooses.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="PFI6Qw">
|
|||
|
|
Francisco’s brief, meanwhile, asks the justices to <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-448/270281/20230703105533891_22-448%20CFSA%20Brief%20for%20Respondents.pdf">impose two new limits on federal spending</a> that are not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Tg6aR9">
|
|||
|
|
<em>First</em>, Francisco argues that the CFPB is unconstitutional because Congress <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-448/270281/20230703105533891_22-448%20CFSA%20Brief%20for%20Respondents.pdf">did not appropriate a “specific sum”</a> of money to the agency. Rather than laying out in a statute exactly how much money the CFPB may spend in 2022, for example, Congress said that the CFPB may spend <em>up to</em> $734 million, but that the agency was also allowed to spend less money if did not believe that it needed this entire sum to fund its operations.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="ceJObt">
|
|||
|
|
Merely describing this argument is enough to refute it. Nothing in the Constitution even suggests that Congress may not permit a federal agency to spend <em>less</em> money than the maximum amount of funds that the legislature has allocated.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="htH5bW">
|
|||
|
|
If taken seriously, moreover, this argument would invalidate most federal spending, and it would make it impossible for benefit programs like Social Security and Medicare to even exist. As the Justice Department tells the Court, “Congress routinely appropriates sums ‘not to exceed’ a particular amount” and “<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-448/274470/20230802113142512_22-448rbUnitedStates.pdf">that phrase appears more than 400 times</a>” in the 2022 legislation funding the federal government. Francisco’s novel reading of the Constitution endangers all of these appropriations.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="UecBMA">
|
|||
|
|
Under this interpretation of the Constitution, moreover, many key federal programs simply could not exist. Medicare, for example, is a health insurance program that <a href="https://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title18/1812.htm">pays for beneficiaries’ health costs as those costs arise</a>. It is impossible for Congress to determine, in advance, the specific dollar amount that Medicare will spend in any given year. To do so, Congress would need to precisely predict which health services would be provided to every senior in the United States, and how much each one of those services would cost.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="yv2ddi">
|
|||
|
|
<em>Second</em>, Francisco argues that the CFPB’s funding structure is unconstitutional because it is “<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-448/270281/20230703105533891_22-448%20CFSA%20Brief%20for%20Respondents.pdf">perpetual</a>.” That is, Congress passed a law that funds the CFPB until it passes another law eliminating that funding (CFPB spending is still subject to an annual cap, and that cap rises every year with inflation).
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="AEbmH6">
|
|||
|
|
It’s hard to know where to begin with this argument. For starters, <a href="https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/introduction-to-the-federal-budget-process">nearly two-thirds of all federal spending</a> is “perpetual,” with the <a href="https://www.federalbudgetinpictures.com/where-does-all-the-money-go/#:~:text=In%202022%2C%20major%20entitlement%20programs,such%20as%20national%20defense)%20combined.">bulk of that money going to programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid</a> that are funded by permanent appropriations. Only about 30 percent of all federal spending is “discretionary,” meaning that it is determined every year by an annual appropriations bill.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="lmeRP2">
|
|||
|
|
So, under Francisco’s interpretation of the Appropriations Clause, the vast majority of federal spending is unconstitutional.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Xxvm2w">
|
|||
|
|
Moreover, Francisco’s argument is refuted by the Constitution’s explicit text. While the Appropriations Clause contains no language whatsoever imposing a time limit on federal appropriations, a separate provision of the Constitution provides that no law providing funding to the army “<a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-1/">shall be for a longer Term than two Years</a>.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="LiAWGL">
|
|||
|
|
The authors of the Constitution, in other words, explicitly chose to impose a time limit on army appropriations, and to not impose such a limit on all other appropriations.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="CphRNt">
|
|||
|
|
Francisco’s time limit argument also has a practical problem. Even if you agree with him that the framers secretly intended to place an expiration date on all federal spending, what, exactly, is the specific amount of time that may pass before a federal spending bill must sunset? Could Congress pass a law funding the CFPB for five years? What about for 100 years? Or 12 million years? The Constitution does not answer this question, and Francisco doesn’t answer it either.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<h3 id="HBTmQK">
|
|||
|
|
Even Noel Francisco doesn’t appear to agree with Noel Francisco’s interpretation of the Constitution
|
|||
|
|
</h3>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="fcmeE6">
|
|||
|
|
Having laid out these two unprecedented and atextual proposed limits on federal spending, Francisco then <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-448/270281/20230703105533891_22-448%20CFSA%20Brief%20for%20Respondents.pdf">invents a bunch of limits on his own interpretation of the Constitution</a> — which are no less unprecedented and atextual.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="vlOzob">
|
|||
|
|
At one point, for example, Francisco seems to suggest that the CFPB is especially unconstitutional because it is a “law enforcement” agency — the CFPB does not just write rules governing lending, it also brings court cases and other actions enforcing various federal laws. Francisco’s implication appears to be that, if the justices don’t want to create the kind of mass chaos that would result if Social Security and Medicare were invalidated, they could still rule in favor of his client by restricting their decision to federal agencies that do law enforcement.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="lDjken">
|
|||
|
|
Elsewhere in his brief, Francisco draws a distinction between laws appropriating money for “certain spending programs” and laws that fund a federal agency’s “operating budget.” Under this distinction, Congress could still provide for perpetual funding for Social Security benefits, so long as it does not permanently fund the actual government employees who run the Social Security program.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="ZM7tlV">
|
|||
|
|
These proposed limits, of course, appear nowhere in the Constitution. There is nothing whatsoever in the Appropriations Clause, or in any other provision of the nation’s founding document, which even suggests that spending on law enforcement is subject to different rules than other spending, or that federal employee salaries are treated differently than federal benefits.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="e9eZpl">
|
|||
|
|
In any event, the fact that Francisco proposes two novel limits on federal spending, which would fundamentally alter the United States and its government, and then immediately starts backtracking by coming up with arbitrary ways to draw fences around his proposal, should give the justices an extraordinary amount of pause.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="6iYvmh">
|
|||
|
|
Nothing in Francisco’s brief even resembles a legal argument. It’s just a bunch of made-up rules that, until very recently, no court had ever taken seriously.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<h3 id="2jUZDL">
|
|||
|
|
So, where on earth do these awful arguments even come from?
|
|||
|
|
</h3>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="GNZR78">
|
|||
|
|
The <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/21-50826-CV0.pdf">Fifth Circuit’s opinion in <em>Consumer Financial</em></a> mostly paraphrases Judge Edith Jones’s concurring opinion, in a case called <a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4442347190072729626&q=33+F.4th+218&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47&as_vis=1"><em>CFPB v. All American Check Cashing</em></a><em> </em>(2022), which argues that “for Congress’s power of the purse to meaningfully restrain the executive, appropriations to the executive must be temporally bound.” Francisco’s brief also relies heavily on Jones’s <em>All American </em>opinion.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="xXGLbR">
|
|||
|
|
Jones, who President Ronald Reagan appointed to the Fifth Circuit while she was still a thirtysomething <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2022/12/27/23496264/supreme-court-fifth-circuit-trump-court-immigration-housing-sexual-harrassment">former general counsel to the Texas Republican Party</a>, is known for her harsh and often cruel interpretations of federal law. Among other things, she once ruled that a man could be executed after his court-appointed lawyer <a href="https://casetext.com/case/burdine-v-johnson">fell asleep as many as 10 times</a> during his trial for murder. Jones’s <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2022/12/27/23496264/supreme-court-fifth-circuit-trump-court-immigration-housing-sexual-harrassment">views on sexual harassment will make your skin crawl</a>.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="BvQ1Vs">
|
|||
|
|
Her <a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4442347190072729626&q=33+F.4th+218&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47&as_vis=1">opinion in <em>All American</em></a> shows a similar level of sensitivity and rigor. Although it is thick with irrelevant quotes from men discussing the Constitution’s Appropriations Clause — at one point, for example, she quotes James Madison’s statement that “the ‘purse is in the hands of the representatives of the people’ who ‘have the appropriation of all moneys’” — Jones does not appear to cite a single government official, at any level of the federal or any state’s government, who even expressed the idea that the Constitution limits Congress’s power to make permanent appropriations.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="GSuR6P">
|
|||
|
|
Indeed, Jones’s opinion barely demonstrates that any <em>human</em> read the Constitution in this way prior to the <em>All American</em> litigation. Her best evidence that some person, somewhere on the globe, actually had this idea before this lawsuit was filed is a citation to a <a href="https://openyls.law.yale.edu/bitstream/handle/20.500.13051/16554/62_97YaleLJ1343_June1988_.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y">1988 law review article</a>, which argues that “Congress abdicates, rather than exercises, its power of the purse if it creates permanent or other open-ended spending authority that effectively escapes periodic legislative review and limitation.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="1AfW1e">
|
|||
|
|
It is far from clear, in other words, whether Edith Jones’s <em>All American </em>opinion would receive a passing grade if a law student submitted it as their final paper in a law school seminar on congressional appropriations, as it offers no meaningful evidence whatsoever for its central claim.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="dvFNey">
|
|||
|
|
And yet Jones, Francisco, and several other Fifth Circuit judges would endanger the entire nation’s economy over a theory that has no basis in any legal text, and barely any support in all of the scholarship that has ever been produced by the American legal academy since the Constitution took effect in 1789.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="7gNAB3">
|
|||
|
|
Again, it is highly unlikely that five justices will sign onto this madness. But the fact that any judge would sign their name to this verkakte legal theory — and a total of seven Fifth Circuit judges joined either <a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4442347190072729626&q=33+F.4th+218&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47&as_vis=1">Jones’ <em>All American </em>opinion</a>, the <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/21-50826-CV0.pdf">court’s <em>Consumer Protection</em> opinion</a>, or both — raises serious questions about whether those judges are fit to serve.
|
|||
|
|
</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><strong>Why Biden’s latest gun violence initiative has activists optimistic</strong> -
|
|||
|
|
<figure>
|
|||
|
|
<img alt="" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/YaOR-AXlFYfxpzJtqgkQZBGLfUg=/632x0:7044x4809/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/72678863/GettyImages_1257763156.0.jpg"/>
|
|||
|
|
<figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
President Biden delivers remarks on the one-year anniversary of the mass shooting in Uvalde, Texas, — which left 19 school children and two adults dead — at the White House in May 2023. | Drew Angerer/Getty Images
|
|||
|
|
</figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
</figure>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
The new White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention, Biden said, comes “in the absence of that sorely needed action.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="tMTejY">
|
|||
|
|
Speaking in front of gun violence survivors, activists, and lawmakers, President Joe Biden on Friday announced a new White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention, an effort he promised would “centralize, accelerate, and intensify” the federal government’s efforts to combat gun violence.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="DfYmO5">
|
|||
|
|
“After every mass shooting, we hear a very simple message … do something,” Biden said in the White House Rose Garden. “My administration has been working tirelessly to do something,” Biden added, pointing to executive actions his administration had taken on <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/07/11/fact-sheet-the-biden-administrations-21-executive-actions-to-reduce-gun-violence/">ghost guns and gun trafficking</a>, as well as the <a href="https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/PLAW-117publ159">Bipartisan Safer Communities Act,</a> landmark legislation that became law in 2022.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Ul9oUP">
|
|||
|
|
The new office, according to Biden, is one more attempt to answer that call, helping, for example, to “coordinate support for survivors, families, and communities affected by gun violence,” an effort that he said would be similar to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the government’s on-the-ground emergency response team. The office will also seek to identify more executive actions the president can take. Biden <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/09/21/president-joe-biden-to-establish-first-ever-white-house-office-of-gun-violence-prevention-to-be-overseen-by-vice-president-kamala-harris/">noted</a> that he would continue to urge Congress to take legislative action on banning assault weapons and implementing universal background checks. Until then, he said the White House and activists will move forward with or without them.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="cFSw0L">
|
|||
|
|
There have been more than 500 mass shootings in 2023, <a href="https://www.axios.com/2023/09/17/mass-shootings-500-united-states-2023">according to</a> the Gun Violence Archive, and more than 30,000 firearm-related deaths. Gun violence deaths among teens and children also rose an alarming <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/06/gun-deaths-among-us-kids-rose-50-percent-in-two-years/">50 percent</a> between 2019 and 2021 to become the leading <a href="https://www.kff.org/mental-health/issue-brief/child-and-teen-firearm-mortality-in-the-u-s-and-peer-countries/#:~:text=Provisional%20CDC%20data%20from%202022,third%20year%20in%20a%20row.">cause of death</a> for children in the United States.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="AaJfcf">
|
|||
|
|
Stefanie Feldman, an aide to President Biden who’s been working on gun safety policy with him for over a decade, <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/09/21/president-joe-biden-to-establish-first-ever-white-house-office-of-gun-violence-prevention-to-be-overseen-by-vice-president-kamala-harris/">will be the director</a> of the new office. In an interview with Vox, she said that the office is meant to implement the laws and policies passed during Biden’s tenure, including the <a href="https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/PLAW-117publ159">Bipartisan Safer Communities Act</a> and the <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/07/11/fact-sheet-the-biden-administrations-21-executive-actions-to-reduce-gun-violence/">president’s executive actions on gun violence</a>. “The president wants to make sure we get it done right.” She also reiterated the message that the president and vice president would urge but not wait on Congress to pass new laws.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="0sLlkE">
|
|||
|
|
Currently, multiple government agencies are involved in efforts to reduce gun violence, including the Department of Justice, which gives <a href="https://bja.ojp.gov/funding/opportunities/o-bja-2023-171647">grants to communities working to prevent gun violence</a>; the Department of Health and Human Services, which <a href="https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2023/06/16/biden-harris-administration-takes-additional-actions-to-address-mental-health-needs-of-young-people-and-make-communities-safer-from-gun-violence.html">funds research studying gun violence as a health epidemic</a>; the FBI, which runs <a href="https://www.fbi.gov/news/testimony/gun-violence-prevention-and-enforcement">criminal background checks</a>; and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which <a href="https://www.americanprogress.org/article/important-gun-violence-prevention-agency-youve-never-heard/">enforces national gun laws and regulates firearms sales</a>. The White House, its gun reform allies in Congress, and advocates have been coordinating with one another for years. This office puts all of those efforts under one roof, with a dedicated leadership team inside the executive branch.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="JspFSR">
|
|||
|
|
Leading the effort will be Vice President Kamala Harris, a former prosecutor who has <a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-guns-mass-shootings-kamala-harris-e4ae51704d1e065fef0fb656043d6cf0">worked on gun safety issues</a> during her time in the White House. At the ceremony, Harris drew on her past experiences as a prosecutor in making a case for the office. “I’ve seen with my own eyes what a bullet does to the human body,” she said. “We cannot normalize any of this.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="aQ1U0R">
|
|||
|
|
Two prominent activists in the gun violence prevention movement, Greg Jackson, executive director of the Community Access Justice Fund, and Rob Wilcox, former senior director of federal and government affairs at Everytown for Gun Safety, will serve as deputy directors. Both have a personal connection to their work: Wilcox <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/09/21/president-joe-biden-to-establish-first-ever-white-house-office-of-gun-violence-prevention-to-be-overseen-by-vice-president-kamala-harris/">lost a family member</a> to gun violence, and Jackson was <a href="https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/local/dc/dream-makers-gregory-jackson-jr-is-hoping-to-end-gun-violence/65-2f738759-d9b5-4f03-b31b-92dee01116a5">shot and seriously injured</a> in Washington, DC, in 2013.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="SQW9tO">
|
|||
|
|
Gun violence reformers have been <a href="https://giffords.org/memo/gun-safety-priorities-for-the-biden-harris-administration/">pushing</a> the Biden administration to create a special office since at least the beginning of his tenure. The creation of a task force inside the White House was one of the <a href="https://files.giffords.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Establish-a-White-House-Task-Force-on-Gun-Violence-Prevention-1.pdf">primary recommendations</a> from the Center for American Progress and Giffords, the gun violence reform group headed by former Congress member and gun violence survivor Gabrielle Giffords. She revealed that she also wrote a letter to the then-president-elect about creating a task force. Giffords acknowledged that the scourge of gun violence wouldn’t be resolved overnight, “but every step forward will save lives — and today’s announcement is a giant step forward,” she wrote.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="VKHcrf">
|
|||
|
|
The president’s move was praised by leaders across a wide range of disciplines. “It really speaks to the gravity of the issue,” Chethan Sathya, a pediatric trauma surgeon who leads <a href="https://www.northwell.edu/chethan-sathya-md">Northwell Health’s gun violence prevention center</a>, told Vox. “This is one of our chief public health crises, <a href="https://www.vox.com/23662072/children-guns-mass-shootings-covenant">a main killer of kids in this country</a>. We need folks singularly focused on this issue.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="EDg7tx">
|
|||
|
|
Lucy McBath, a Democratic Georgia Congress member whose son, Jordan Davis, <a href="https://www.news4jax.com/news/local/2022/11/17/10-years-after-murder-of-jordan-davis-loved-ones-plan-to-help-community-in-his-honor/">was murdered in 2012</a>, also appeared at the White House press briefing Friday. “Nobody wants to experience what I have, but my story is becoming far too common in the United States,” McBath said. Biden, she said, “is taking decisive action by declaring loudly and clearly: We do not have to live this way.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="FahYmN">
|
|||
|
|
The White House’s invitation to activists to help coordinate its effort shows that it recognizes that the movement has grown considerably in the last 10 years, becoming more powerful and effective. “The biggest fundamental change is that survivors took over,” Jackson, who is joining the office as deputy director, told Vox <a href="https://www.vox.com/23672891/gun-violence-mass-shootings-us-deaths">earlier this year</a>. “Survivors went from being voices that contribute to some broader campaign to being the leaders of everything. When survivors started to take over … we saw a huge shift away from simple hardware regulation [of firearms] to an array of solutions that are chipping away at the problem, and a more comprehensive approach.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="7rBEFE">
|
|||
|
|
The creation of the office also reflects that gun-safety proponents represent a real constituency in American politics: According to a <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/09/13/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns/">Pew Research Center report</a> from earlier this year, six in 10 Americans say gun violence is a serious problem, 61 percent say it’s too easy to legally obtain a gun, and 58 percent support stricter gun laws. Rep. Maxwell Frost (D), the first Gen-Z member of Congress, has made ending gun violence one of his <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/dec/28/maxwell-frost-gen-z-mass-shooting-generation">top legislative priorities</a>. He introduced Biden at the event and noted that “this issue, especially for young people, especially for marginalized communities, is a matter of survival.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Xh7cYs">
|
|||
|
|
For the millions of Americans who want to see an end to the horrific toll that gun violence takes every year, there’s an <a href="https://www.vox.com/23141551/mass-shooting-uvalde-texas-sandy-hook-gun-control">understandable sense of despair</a> that sets in after news of gun violence — and a healthy amount of skepticism when politicians offer solutions that seem to fall short. In opening the office, though, the White House seems to be acknowledging that it can’t afford to wait for Republicans to get on board. Directing his final comments at the survivors and activists, Biden explicitly aligned himself and his administration with their cause. “You’re right. We’re by your side, and we’re never going to give up dealing with this problem,” he said. “We can do this, we just have to keep going. We just have to keep the faith.”
|
|||
|
|
</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
</ul>
|
|||
|
|
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-the-hindu-sports">From The Hindu: Sports</h1>
|
|||
|
|
<ul>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Tennis | Priyanshi Bhandari wins AITA women’s tournament</strong> -</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>India reach number one in all three cricket formats</strong> - The Indian team moved past arch-rivals Pakistan to take the top position in the one-day rankings</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Morning Digest | Canada shared intelligence with India weeks ago, says Trudeau; Sports Minister to skip Asiad as China bars Arunachal players, and more</strong> - Here is a select list of stories to start the day</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Arsenal captain Odegaard signs new contract</strong> - Martin Odegaard follows in the footsteps of Bukayo Saka, Gabriel Martinelli and William Saliba, who have all extended their deals</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Verstappen gets back on track ahead of Japanese GP qualifying</strong> - Red Bull’s Verstappen put down a lap of 1min 30.688sec to finish 0.320sec quicker than second-placed Charles Leclerc of Ferrari in the second practice</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
</ul>
|
|||
|
|
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-the-hindu-national-news">From The Hindu: National News</h1>
|
|||
|
|
<ul>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Hydrogen project of KSEB: Nine firms present proposals</strong> - KSEB identifies its own land at the Brahmapuram Diesel Power Plant as a possible location for the pilot project.</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>PM Modi gives credit to women for passage of women’s reservation bill in Parliament</strong> - Striking a chord with the voters of Varanasi, Mr. Modi said “your MP from Kashi got the privilege” of getting the women’s reservation bill passed in Parliament.</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Alliance with JD(S) will spell doom for BJP: M. Veerappa Moily</strong> - He said the Congress had bitter taste of alliance with Janata Dal (Secular).</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Then president Kovind not invited for foundation laying of new Parliament building as he is ‘untouchable’: Kharge</strong> - He said the BJP thought of the women’s reservation bill just ahead of elections as several opposition parties have formed the INDIA bloc.</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>NIA arrests one accused in Manipur transnational conspiracy case</strong> - Myanmar-based leaders of insurgent groups and proscribed terror outfits were ‘collecting arms, ammunition and explosives by unlawful means, including plunder and pillage of government facilities’, the agency alleges</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
</ul>
|
|||
|
|
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-bbc-europe">From BBC: Europe</h1>
|
|||
|
|
<ul>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Ukraine war: US to give Kyiv long-range ATACMS missiles - media reports</strong> - Kyiv has long been pushing for ATACMS missiles capable of hitting Russian targets far behind the front line.</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Ukraine hits HQ of Russia’s symbolic Black Sea navy</strong> - The attack came as Ukraine’s president made an unannounced visit to meet Canada’s PM in Ottawa.</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>‘The state says our kids don’t exist’ - how LGBT life is changing in Italy</strong> - Italy is removing children from registers and stopping surrogacy abroad in new rules affecting same-sex couples.</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Pope Francis says migration is a reality in call for action during France visit</strong> - The pontiff says people risking their lives at sea “do not invade” during a visit to Marseille.</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Panic in Nagorno-Karabakh but Azerbaijan rejects fears of ethnic cleansing</strong> - Thousands of ethnic Armenians fear for their safety despite Azerbaijan’s promises.</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
</ul>
|
|||
|
|
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-ars-technica">From Ars Technica</h1>
|
|||
|
|
<ul>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>The history of syphilis is being rewritten by a medieval skeleton</strong> - Columbus may not have brought syphilis back to the Old World after all. - <a href="https://arstechnica.com/?p=1970581">link</a></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>NASA’s asteroid sampling mission is on course for landing this weekend</strong> - “The spacecraft trajectory and performance have just been spot on.” - <a href="https://arstechnica.com/?p=1970566">link</a></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>3 iOS 0-days, a cellular network compromise, and HTTP used to infect an iPhone</strong> - Apple patches 3 zero-days after they were used in a sophisticated attack. - <a href="https://arstechnica.com/?p=1970625">link</a></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>RSV vaccine during pregnancy gets seasonal sign-off from CDC</strong> - The vaccine is recommended for use only in the run-up to RSV season. - <a href="https://arstechnica.com/?p=1970620">link</a></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Unity exec tells Ars he’s on a mission to earn back developer trust</strong> - Interview: “It was not our intent to nickel-and-dime it, but it came across that way.” - <a href="https://arstechnica.com/?p=1970584">link</a></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
</ul>
|
|||
|
|
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-jokes-subreddit">From Jokes Subreddit</h1>
|
|||
|
|
<ul>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>A man with a winking problem is applying for a position as a sales representative for a large firm.</strong> - <!-- SC_OFF --></p>
|
|||
|
|
<div class="md">
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
The interviewer looks over his papers and says, “This is phenomenal. You’ve graduated from the best schools, your recommendations are wonderful, and your experience is unparalleled. Normally, we’d hire you without a second thought. However, a sales representative has a highly visible position, and we’re afraid that your constant winking will scare off potential customers. I’m sorry…. we can’t hire you.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“But wait,” the man says. “If I take two aspirin, I’ll stop winking!”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“Really? Great! Show me!”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
So the applicant reaches into his jacket pocket and begins pulling out all sorts of condoms: red condoms, blue condoms, ribbed condoms, flavored condoms; finally, at the bottom, he finds a packet of aspirin. He tears it open, swallows the pills, and stops winking.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“Well,” said the interviewer, “that’s all well and good, but this is a respectable company, and we will not have our employees womanizing all over the country!”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“Womanizing? What do you mean? I’m a happily married man!”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“Well then, how do you explain all these condoms?”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“Oh, that,” he sighed.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“Have you ever walked into a pharmacy, winking, and asked for aspirin?”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
</div>
|
|||
|
|
<!-- SC_ON -->
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"> submitted by <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/xavi24"> /u/xavi24 </a> <br/> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/16pt37p/a_man_with_a_winking_problem_is_applying_for_a/">[link]</a></span> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/16pt37p/a_man_with_a_winking_problem_is_applying_for_a/">[comments]</a></span></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>I asked a Chinese girl for her number,</strong> - <!-- SC_OFF --></p>
|
|||
|
|
<div class="md">
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
She said, “Sex! Sex! Sex! Free sex tonight!” I said, “Wow!” Then her friend said, “She means 666-3629.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
</div>
|
|||
|
|
<!-- SC_ON -->
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"> submitted by <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/makuna_hatata-"> /u/makuna_hatata- </a> <br/> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/16q0h3p/i_asked_a_chinese_girl_for_her_number/">[link]</a></span> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/16q0h3p/i_asked_a_chinese_girl_for_her_number/">[comments]</a></span></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Little 6-year old John Smith’s parents felt really horny at 11 AM on Sunday and wanted to make love,</strong> - <!-- SC_OFF --></p>
|
|||
|
|
<div class="md">
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
but had to get John away for at least one hour. So they told him to go to the balcony and report all activities of their neighbours for the next hour. Being the innocent, dutiful son he was raised to be, he did as he was told. His parents amused themselves, and then came the formality of the report at 12 PM. John said “For the past hour, the Wilsons were watching TV, Mr. Cole was playing the piano, the Johnsons were playing carrom together and the Donalds were having sex.” His parents were shocked! They asked him “How do you know that?” He said “Their son was out on the balcony too.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
</div>
|
|||
|
|
<!-- SC_ON -->
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"> submitted by <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/makuna_hatata-"> /u/makuna_hatata- </a> <br/> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/16q0npx/little_6year_old_john_smiths_parents_felt_really/">[link]</a></span> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/16q0npx/little_6year_old_john_smiths_parents_felt_really/">[comments]</a></span></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>A married couple were sitting at their dinner table when the wife says, “I cannot believe it!”</strong> - <!-- SC_OFF --></p>
|
|||
|
|
<div class="md">
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
The husband looks up and asks, “you can’t believe what?”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
The wife turns her phone around and shows him what she was reading.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“Did you know, in Las Vegas, you can make $400 just for giving a BJ! Easy money! Fuck you, I’m out of here!”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
She goes to the bedroom and starts packing all of her belongings. Soon, her husband joins her and starts packing as well.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“I’m serious, I’m really leaving for good!” The wife says
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“I believe you and I support your decision. I just want to see how you live off of $800 a year!”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
</div>
|
|||
|
|
<!-- SC_ON -->
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"> submitted by <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/GastropodSoup"> /u/GastropodSoup </a> <br/> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/16pjevn/a_married_couple_were_sitting_at_their_dinner/">[link]</a></span> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/16pjevn/a_married_couple_were_sitting_at_their_dinner/">[comments]</a></span></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>A man takes his wife to the stock show. They start heading down the alley that had the bulls. They come up to the first bull and his sign stated: “This bull mated 50 times last year.” The wife turns to her husband and says, “He mated 50 times in a year, you could learn from him.”</strong> - <!-- SC_OFF --></p>
|
|||
|
|
<div class="md">
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
They proceed to the next bull and his sign stated: “This bull mated 65 times last year.” The wife turns to her husband and says, “This one mated 65 times last year. That is over 5 times a month. You can learn from this one, also.” They proceeded to the last bull and his sign said: “This bull mated 365 times last year.” The wife’s mouth drops open and says, “WOW! He mated 365 times last year. That is ONCE A DAY! You could really learn from this one.” The man turns to his wife and says, “Go up and see if it was 365 times with the same cow.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
</div>
|
|||
|
|
<!-- SC_ON -->
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"> submitted by <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/YZXFILE"> /u/YZXFILE </a> <br/> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/16q06v1/a_man_takes_his_wife_to_the_stock_show_they_start/">[link]</a></span> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/16q06v1/a_man_takes_his_wife_to_the_stock_show_they_start/">[comments]</a></span></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
</ul>
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
<script>AOS.init();</script></body></html>
|