Sunday, September 8, 2024
Home Blog Page 222

With epic Republicans failure, Democrats urged to go bold with medicare-for-all

Americans rallied against the GOP to defend their right to healthcare, Democrats are being urged to seize on the moment

by Lauren McCauley
Common Dreams

Though the Republican narrative that Obamacare is “imploding” has been proven to be an unfounded talking point, The Week‘s Ryan Cooper argued Friday that Democrats “shouldn’t sit idly by and wait for Republicans to slowly bleed Obamacare to death by other means.”

“They need a counter-offer,” Cooper writes, “one that’s more compelling than the creaky status quo. They need a single-payer, Medicare-for-All plan.”
Similarly, RoseAnn DeMoro, executive director of National Nurses United (NNU), told Common Dreams that ultimately Democrats “are fighting for an unacceptable status quo,” noting that a private insurance market will always prove to be “unaffordable.”

In a press statement she expanded on this idea:

Many of the criticisms of the ACA are, in fact valid. For all the improvements under the ACA, primarily the expansion of Medicaid and crackdown on some insurance abuses, the ACA still left 28 million without health coverage, and millions more struggling with un-payable medical bills and escalating out of pocket costs.   

Where the Democrats too fell short was their failure in drafting the ACA to refute the underlying source of the health care crisis in the first place, the contradiction between a health care system that should be based on patient need and the public health and well being, and the insatiable demand of health care corporations for profits first.

Dr. Carol Paris, president of Physicians for National Health Program (PNHP), which has long-advocated for single-payer system, said Friday’s failure by the Republican Party to pass their “slash and burn” healthcare bill “presents a unique opportunity to move beyond” a profit-based system.

Though Paris acknowledged the GOP plan would have “pushed millions more Americans off their health insurance, sending the rates of medical bankruptcy and preventable deaths skyrocketing,” she said the shortcomings of the ACA should not be ignored.

“The ACA left 29 million Americans uninsured and channeled billions of taxpayer dollars to a patchwork of wasteful private insurers, each one skimming off its own share of administrative costs and profit that should have been spent on patient care,” Dr. Paris noted. “Let’s clear the drawing board—it’s time to adopt a simple, commonsense approach to national health care.”

Pointing to the collapse of the GOP’s attempt at reform, DeMoro says it’s clear their party has no viable pathway towards a solution. “The Republicans are ideologically split it appears,” she said. “Trump is trying to maintain that everyone should have healthcare and the cost should go down—that solution, and the only possible solution is Medicare-for-All.”

In a Friday press statement, Rep. Luis  Gutiérrez (D-IL) echoed this call. “We have known for years that the only true healthcare reform that will work is a single-payer system where we take national responsibility for the health of our nation,” he said. “Now that this vote is over, I hope we can return to a serious and sensible discussion of strengthening our healthcare system and the improving the health of all Americans.”

In addition to Medicare-for-All being “quite clearly the best universal health-care policy option for the United States,” The Week‘s Cooper also observed that “Obamacare did not finish the job of achieving universal health care, and this is a good chance to move the ball forward.”

The AHCA, Cooper continues, “is extraordinarily unpopular because it takes coverage and subsidies away from people, and a majority believe that it should be the government’s responsibility to make sure everyone is covered. Fundamentally, Medicare is very popular, a fact only partially covered up by generations of red-baiting and duplicitous austerian propaganda.”

Further, he notes that “it also makes an excellent organizing signpost. Medicare-for-All is simple, easy to understand, and hard to argue against or distort.”

The math works out too. Dr. David Himmelstein and Dr. Steffie Woolhandler, both of whom are closely associated with PNHP, published an analysis this week which found that replacing the ACA “with a universal, single-payer health system, along the lines of the Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act, H.R. 676, would provide immediate coverage to the 26 million Americans who are currently uninsured, saving at least 20,984 lives in year one.”

This is in contrast to the Congressional Budget Office estimate that as many as 24 million people would lose health coverage by 2026 under the AHCA.
Responding to Friday’s developments, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) called the failure of the AHCA a “great victory,” but said that lawmakers’ work would not be complete until healthcare was guaranteed “to all people as a right”:

Contrary to Republican orthodoxy, many of Trump’s blue collar supporters voted for him specifically because he promised to “take care of everybody.” Speaking with some of those voters in West Virginia recently, Sandersfound that many do believe that healthcare should be guaranteed as a human right.

Sanders, who made Medicare-for-All a key plank of his 2016 presidential campaign, said recently that the president’s supporters “are catching on that Trump lied.”

Robert Frank, an economics professor at the Johnson Graduate School of Management at Cornell University, argued in a New York Times op-ed Friday that the president could preserve the floundering effort to replace Obamacare while making good on his campaign promises by getting behind a Medicare-for-All, or single payer, healthcare plan.

Trump should use his “political leverage…to jettison the traditional Republican approach in favor of a form of the single-payer health care that most other countries use.”

Mexico gearing up for NAFTA talks

Briefing by Jordana Timerman

NAFTA is vital for Mexico. And U.S. President Donald Trumps threats to upend the free trade agreement seeking better terms for the U.S. threw Mexico’s economy into a tizzy. But now the uncertainty is dragging on — affecting foreign investment and other key indicators. So Mexican leaders are focusing energies in getting their U.S. counterparts to move on with the promised renegotiation, reports the New York Times.

Already administration officials have set down some limitations — saying discussion of Mexican payment for a proposed border wall, for example, would be a deal breaker. Last week Mexican Foreign Minister Luis Videgaray said Mexico will pull out of the deal if the new terms offered are not beneficial to the country, reports Bloomberg.

And on the U.S. side, analysts say Trump’s administration might be overwhelmed with other political conflicts to dwell on Mexican trade. Nonetheless, U.S. commerce secretary Wilbur Ross is expected to formally notify Congress of the Trump administration’s plans to renegotiate, which will trigger a 90-day consultation period with Congress, after which formal negotiations can begin, according to Bloomberg.

The U.S. proposal could be further hindered by the delicate situation Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto finds himself in, according to the NYT piece: delays could further hit the country’s economy, driving down his already low popularity ratings and robbing him of political capital to make concessions to the U.S.
Counter to the NYT piece, last week the Financial Times argued that Mexico’s economy has learned to deal with the Trump era. “Uncertainty is the new normal,” argues the piece which points to indications that the U.S. will seek a sensible deal, and Mexican officials’ successful hedging of the peso.

And U.S. farmers are lobbying hard on both sides of the border, concerned that their exports are going to be collateral damage in the upcoming NAFTA renegotiation, reports the Wall Street Journal. Mexico is the primary market for many U.S. grain, meat and dairy products, and agricultural groups have been seeking to strengthen ties with Mexican clients and government officials in order to avoid potential retaliatory tariffs.

Hurting Mexico will only favor China, a poor decision for the Trump administration, argues Larry Summers in the Financial Times. On the one hand, economically it would eliminate the edge Mexican products have over Chinese. And as many Mexican exports to the U.S. are inputs to further U.S. production, it would affect U.S. manufacturing competition with China.

But, he notes, it would also give China diplomatic leverage by creating a potential anti-U.S. ally.

“As illustrated by the more than $60bn China has poured into Hugo Chávez’s Venezuela, Beijing would regard opportunities to ally with a hard left anti-American government as strategic windfalls. What better than a country of 130 million people with a 2,000-mile border with the US? Every Mexican with whom I spoke said that the risk of their country electing a Chávez-like government had gone way up in recent months on account of American disrespect and truculence.”

Is Summers referring to presidential frontrunner Andrés Manuel López Obrador? Maybe, as he was at an Acapulco banking conference this weekend in which Mexican financiers and politicians blasted populism in an apparently thinly veiled criticism of AMLO, as he is called, according to Reuters.

López Obrador, a serious presidential contender in the 2018 Mexican election, who has ran two time already, was in San Francisco on Monday, March 20, where he spoke to approximately 200 people at the Mission District’s Grand Theater, now Gray Area. He promised to end corruption in Mexico if he won the presidency.

7th Annual Winter San Jose Jazz Festival 2017

Compiled by the El Reportero’s staff

San Jose Jazz proudly announces the official Winter Fest 2017 lineup: Roy Ayers, Donny McCaslin, The Cookers, Wallace Roney, Villalobos Brothers, Ben Allison & Think Free, Huntertones, Kim Nalley and Kalil Wilson, Mary Stallings, Natalie Cressman, Ron E. Beck Soul Revue, Reva DeVito, CME, Mark PLSTK, Shea Butter, Chale Brown, Troker, Jazz Organ Fellowship with Akiko Tsuruga and Tony Monaco, The Eulipions Jazz Sessions, Silvestre Martinez, and some of the Bay Area’s premier youth jazz ensembles.

Within the heart of Silicon Valley, San Jose Jazz Winter Fest 2017, the Jazz Beyond series, co-curated with local production house Universal Grammar, presents buzzy young stars pushing the boundaries of jazz, soul and hip-hop and the Next Gen performances showcase top regional student jazz ensembles and offer up master classes.

Coming up from now through March 3, 2017, San Jose Jazz presents its 7th Annual SJZ Winter Fest 2017, featuring more than 25 concerts in downtown San Jose, Saratoga and Palo Alto.

Now thru Friday, March 3, 2017, at Cafe Stritch, The Continental, Schultz Cultural Arts Hall at Oshman Family JCC (Palo Alto), Trianon Theatre, MACLA, Café Pink House (Saratoga), Poor House Bistro, Hedley and other venues in Downtown San Jose. Event Info: sanjosejazz.org/winterfest. Tickets: $10 – $65.

Early bird ticket now on sale for March only

San Francisco International Arts Festival San Francisco International Arts Festival is pleased to announce that a limited number of Early Bird Tickets starting at the incredible price of $12.50 will go on-sale for the 2017 Festival at the Fort Mason Center for Arts & Culture at 8 a.m. on Wednesday March 1 until 11:59 p.m. on March 31.

Starting April 1 tickets will average $25. Members of the public are encouraged to book early to take advantage of the best deals to see top performing artists from the Bay Area and 15 countries.

Partial calendar listing of artists at SFIAF 2017

Opening Night on Thursday May 25 will include multiple performances featuring the spectacular GuGu Drum Group from Shanghai, China. From France the US debut of Stereoptik who perform an ingenious shadow puppet play Dark Circus. Local artists STEAMROLLER will revive their signature hit Siamese Dream and Fort Mason Center residents Embark Gallery will present View from the Pit. The whole evening will be serenaded by the authentic powerhouse Puerto Rican sounds of the Latin Rhythm Boys.

The Bay Area debut of pianist Pablo Estigarrabia from Argentina, ABADÁ Capoeira in collaboration with dancers from Brazil, Europe and Canada.
San Francisco International Arts FestivaFort Mason Center for Arts & CultureMay 25 – June 4, 2017$12.50 SPECIAL FOR MARCH ONLY!Box Office and More Information: www.sfiaf.org 415-399-9554

Exposición fotográfica Trabajamos en los Campos del Norte

Los trabajadores agrícolas están entre los residentes más pobres de California. Un tercero hace menos que el salario mínimo. En San Diego, Santa Rosa, Coachella y Salinas, los migrantes duermen en cabañas o tiendas de campaña bajo los árboles, o acuden a una sala en parques de caravanas. La falta de vivienda y la pobreza rural son generalizadas, pero invisibles. En Los Campos del Norte los hace visibles, demostrando quién es responsable de producir los alimentos que comemos y demostrando que los problemas de justicia social son sufragados en común por las comunidades tanto urbanas como rurales
El premiado fotoperiodista David Bacon exhibición de fotos se muestra en la actualidad.

Las imágenes de los trabajadores agrícolas de Bacon son una sorprendente revelación del trabajo necesario para poner comida en las mesas de los Estados Unidos. Las imágenes en blanco y negro proporcionan una vislumbre en las vidas de los que trabajan en los campos y captan la lucha y la esperanza de su existencia.

Comenzó el 11 de enero y terminará el 11 de abril de 2017. En el Riverside Art Museum, 3425 Misison Inn Ave., Riverside, California.
http://davidbaconrealitycheck.blogspot.com/2017/01/photography-exhibition-trabajamos-we.htm

Neus Espresate, impeller in Mexico of Latin American literature, dies

by Mónica Mateos-Vega
La Jornada

The editor-publisher Mrs. Neus Espresate, one of the great movers of Latin American literature in Mexico, passed away at the age of 83, around 4 p.m., after staying several days hospitalized due to breathing problems, informed their relatives.

Cofounder of Ediciones Era in the 1960s, where she unveiled the first works of authors such as José Emilio Pacheco, winner of the Cervantes Prize in 2009, Neus Espresate Xirau was born in 1934 in Canfranc, Huesca, Spain.

Her family moved to Mexico in the early 40’s of the last century because of the Spanish Civil War. Her father, Tomás Espresate, founded the bookstore and printing company Madero, and collaborated in what would be the great professional project of his daughter, the publishing house Era, whose name was formed with the initials of the surnames of the promoters of this initiative: Neus Espresate, Vicente Rojo and José Azorín, all children of exiled Republicans and militants of the Unified Socialist Youth.

In 2011, when the publisher received an honorary doctorate from the Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana (UAM), for her contribution to the dissemination of knowledge in the social sciences, journalist Elena Poniatowska recalled that Neus “arrived with her brothers Jordi and Enrique (Quique) in 1943. She was a shy and reserved 12-year-old girl who kept secrets and experiences too hard for her few years.

Before being able to leave to Mexico, the children knew schools and convents of the pro-Franco right. Guiomar Rovira (who also comes from Port Bou, in Catalonia, where Walter Benjamin died) recalls that his great-aunt told him that the Espresates were, since then, red. In Mexico, the sky was opened. They had left behind the war and the lonely Atlantic and reunited with their parents. This girl forged in solitude became a formidable reader and a passionate politician; Of lectora happened to propose to his father, Don Tomás, to make an editorial (La Jornada, 8/3/11)

In the 1960s, the first book Era published was La batalla de Cuba, by journalist Fernando Benítez.

The second title was Palabras cruzadas, interviews by Elena Poniatowska.

Gabriel García Márquez published the first edition of The Colonel has no one to write.

After a life that had to face in its beginnings the horrors of fascism, Espresate lamented that in his old age he saw return the blind violence of a dark right, against which I have fought throughout my life.

In 2004, when she was recognized in Spain with the Liber Prize, she insisted that the past should not be forgotten and in that task the editors: we acquired a huge responsibility for the preservation of memory.

The Reporter first received the news from her daughter Isabel Fernandez Espresate, who started almost two decades ago as one of this paper’s translators.
The staff of El Reportero and especially its editor, Marvin Ramirez, extend their most sincere condolences to Isabel and rest of the family for this significant loss. (This article was cut to fit space).

Talking about women inclusion in the TV industry

It looks that EstrellaTV is ahead of its competition in terms of gender inclusion.

“Passing on this very interesting data about LBI Media and how we far exceeded our competitors (Univision, Telemundo, Unimas, Galavision, Azteca América, and Entravision) by far in terms of the number of executive women in our company, proudly said to El Reportero Marco Antonio González, Vice President of EstrellaTV.

“For International Women’s Day… we also celebrate and honor the achievements of our powerful women in LBI Media! Fifteen women at the top of our company, something that makes us very proud of! It is said easy, but not many can achieve it!”

EstrellaTV signal is now being carried by Dish, so it will reach so many more people now.

Millions of Americans live in Mexico, can we continue to coexist?

by Aristóteles Sandoval Díaz

The global political landscape is going through seismic changes. From the vote for Brexit to the election of Donald Trump, we are living in unpredictable times. Trump’s ascent to the presidency has huge implications for global trade relations and for minorities living in North America. Barack Obama’s progressive social reforms look like they may become just a footnote in history. And the special relationship between two great countries – Mexico and the US – could be in grave danger. In this context of upheaval, we have to rethink how we do “neighbor politics.”

In Mexico we firmly believe that “respect for the rights of others is the basis for peaceful coexistence, between individuals as between nations” – in the words of Benito Juárez, the Mexican president whose statue stands not far from the Lincoln Memorial in Washington DC, and who shared the ideals of the first Republican president of the United States of America.

With nearly two million Americans living among us, Mexico is the country with the largest community of US citizens living outside the United States. In the state of Jalisco, of which I am governor, one of the largest communities of expatriate Americans in the world resides peacefully on the banks of Lake Chapala, with thousands of others living in Guadalajara and Puerto Vallarta. These people are an essential part of the heartbeat of our community.
However, I fear the inflammatory rhetoric of Trump could put that social harmony at risk, sowing the seeds of division. The lazy stereotypes he uses are wrong and unbefitting of a man who is now leading one of the greatest countries in the world.

Jalisco was once only known as the birthplace of hot sauce and tequila. Today, it has become Latin America’s Silicon Valley, with a thriving technology industry worth $21bn and on the brink of a quiet economic revolution. There is no doubt the close relationship between the US and Mexico brings huge economic, cultural and social benefits to both countries. The US is Mexico’s main trading partner. The North American Free Trade Agreement allows Mexicans to get US work visas, opening up a gateway of opportunity. Also, six million American jobs – within US territory – depend directly on trade with Mexico. But beyond our trading relationship and our common border, Mexicans and Americans share a dream: one of freedom and prosperity for their people. Let’s not put that at risk.

Tens of thousands of Americans visit our state every year. When they come, they are my constituents – even if it is just for one weekend. Their financial situation or background is irrelevant. Since the beginning of my administration, I have continuously acknowledged their contributions to our society, which are not only financial, but also cultural and social.

In Mexico, as in the United States, these are challenging times and, as in any relationship between two parties, the efforts and actions taken by one will affect the other: every one of the measures Mexico undertakes to improve life in our nation has an impact on our relationship with our northern neighbor. Sometimes, when things don’t turn out as we had hoped, we are tempted to cast blame on the other side for everything. Frustration turns to anger, and decisions based on this anger become a destructive force to those who make them. Let us not forget what Mark Twain said about this: “Anger is an acid that can do more harm to the vessel in which it is stored than to anything on which it is poured.”

The essence of the United States is the richness of its diversity, the joining of forces of people from all around the world who, through their work and effort, have dignified and redefined the worth of those who decide to emigrate, to break down barriers in search of a better future. This is why Mexicans, throughout the world, always identify with those who emphasize our similarities and the way in which we can use them for our mutual benefit, to continue growing, together. We recognize, of course, that neighboring countries are not going to agree on everything. However, problems are solved through better communication, increased cooperation and seeking to find joint solutions.

Building a wall along one of the largest and most dynamic borders in the world is a toxic symbol of mistrust. In one single reckless act, the US risks destroying the very special relationship it has built with Mexico over many years and portraying Mexicans as second-class citizens. A wall is both a physical and a symbolic barrier to the notion of working together to solve common problems. The money invested in building something like this would be better spent in solving structural problems and strengthening ties.

I invite all those who harbor and peddle hatred against Mexico and Mexicans to come to visit. I can guarantee that if Trump or his supporters spent time in Mexico, they would embrace the richness of the country, the humility of the people and see the talent we have. We are at the start of a new era.

The futures of both Mexico and the US are interlocked, so while we live in uncertain times I believe that if we focus more on what unites us rather than divides us, both countries will have a great future together.

The elites won’t save us

NOTE FROM THE EDITOR

Dear readers:

The following article, written by American Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, professor at Princeton University, and author of several New York Times best-sellers, Chris Hedges, is one of those pieces that extracts real juice from the things the mainstream media almost never get to touch – because they are mostly submitted and controlled by the power to be, private interests and corporate greed. Because of lack of space, it will be published in two parts. THIS IS PART ONE OF TWO. – Marvin Ramírez.

The elites won’t save us

by Chris Hedges

The four-decade-long assault on our democratic institutions by corporations has left them weak and largely dysfunctional. These institutions, which surrendered their efficacy and credibility to serve corporate interests, should have been our firewall. Instead, they are tottering under the onslaught.
Labor unions are a spent force. The press is corporatized and distrusted. Universities have been purged of dissidents and independent scholars who criticize neoliberalism and decry the decay of democratic institutions and political parties. Public broadcasting and the arts have been defunded and left on life support. The courts have been stacked with judges whose legal careers were spent serving corporate power, a trend in appointments that continued under Barack Obama. Money has replaced the vote, which is how someone as unqualified as Betsy DeVos can buy herself a Cabinet seat. And the Democratic Party, rather than sever its ties to Wall Street and corporations, is naively waiting in the wings to profit from a Trump debacle.

“The biggest asset Trump has is the decadent, clueless, narcissistic, corporate-indentured, war-mongering Democratic Party,” Ralph Nader said when I reached him by phone in Washington. “If the Democratic strategy is waiting for Godot, waiting for Trump to implode, we are in trouble. And just about everything you say about the Democrats you can say about the AFL-CIO. They don’t control the train.”

The loss of credibility by democratic institutions has thrust the country into an existential as well as economic crisis. The courts, universities and press are no longer trusted by tens of millions of Americans who correctly see them as organs of the corporate elites. These institutions are traditionally the mechanisms by which a society is able to unmask the lies of the powerful, critique ruling ideologies and promote justice. Because Americans have been bitterly betrayed by their institutions, the Trump regime can attack the press as the “opposition party,” threaten to cut off university funding, taunt a federal jurist as a “so-called judge” and denounce a court order as “outrageous.”

The decay of democratic institutions is the prerequisite for the rise of authoritarian or fascist regimes. This decay has given credibility to a pathological liar. The Trump administration, according to an Emerson College poll, is considered by 49 percent of registered voters to be truthful while the media are considered truthful by only 39 percent of registered voters. Once American democratic institutions no longer function, reality becomes whatever absurdity the White House issues.

Most of the rules of democracy are unwritten. These rules determine public comportment and ensure respect for democratic norms, procedures and institutions. President Trump has, to the delight of his supporters, rejected this political and cultural etiquette.

Hannah Arendt in The Origins of Totalitarianism, noted that when democratic institutions collapse it is “easier to accept patently absurd propositions than the old truths which have become pious banalities.” The chatter of the liberal ruling elites about our democracy is itself an absurdity. “Vulgarity with its cynical dismissal of respected standards and accepted theories,” she wrote, infects political discourse. This vulgarity is “mistaken for courage and a new style of life.”

“He is destroying one code of behavior after another,” Nader said of Trump. “He is so far getting away with it and not paying a price. He is breaking standards of behavior—what he says about women, commercializing the White House, I am the law.”

Nader said he does not think the Republican Party will turn against Trump or consider impeachment unless his presidency appears to threaten its chances of retaining power in the 2018 elections. Nader sees the Democratic Party as too “decadent and incompetent” to mount a serious challenge to Trump. Hope, he said, comes from the numerous protests that have been mounted in the streets, at town halls held by members of Congress and at flash points such as Standing Rock. It may also come from the 2.5 million civil servants within the federal government if a significant number refuse to cooperate with Trump’s authoritarianism.

“The new president is clearly aware of the power wielded by civil servants, who swear an oath of allegiance to the U.S. Constitution, not to any president or administration,” Maria J. Stephan, the co-author of “Why Civil Resistance Works,” writes in The Washington Post. “One of Trump’s first acts as president was a sweeping federal hiring freeze affecting all new and existing positions except those related to the military, national security and public safety. Even before Trump’s inauguration, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives reinstated an obscure 1876 rule that would allow Congress to slash the salaries of individual federal workers. This was a clear warning to those serving in government to keep their heads down. Trump’s high-profile firing of acting attorney general Sally Yates, who refused to follow the president’s immigration ban, sent shock waves through the bureaucracy.”

A sustained, nationwide popular uprising of nonviolent obstruction and noncooperation is the only weapon left to save the republic. The elites will respond once they become afraid. If we do not make them afraid we will fail.

Up to 90 percent of urinary tract infections caused by chicken meet

by Russel Davis

Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are caused by an array of factors such as sexual activity and age. However, food choice also appears to be a key culprit in the onset of UTIs. A study, published by the CDC in the journal Emerging Infectious Diseases, found that the source of the bacteria Escherichia coli (E.coli) found in female UTI sufferers was both fresh and processed meat and poultry products. Researchers also found that chicken meat accounted for 61 percent of E.coli occurrences in said group.

Another, more recent study, published in the journal Applied and Environmental Microbiology showed that more than half of examined chicken products were culture positive for E.coli, while a third were resistant to multiple antibiotics. Research data also showed that 70 percent to 90 percent of UTIs are caused by E.coli. The results suggest a strong correlation between meat products and clinically relevant strains of the infection, researchers said.

More bacteria present in grocery store-bought chicken meat

The source where live chickens were purchased is considered the key factor in the dirt that’s being leveled on supermarket-bought chicken meat. The online edition of Men’s Health Magazine has listed chicken meat among its top 10 dirtiest foods that consumers eat, and for good reasons. According to their online report, the advocacy group Consumer Union examined 484 raw broilers and found that 42 percent were infected with Campylobacter jejuni, while 12 percent were infected by Salmonella enterides. The online article explains that close counters in hen houses give way to bug infestation. High volume processing operations were also pointed out as a major contributor that affects the quality of chicken meat. Experts recommend opting for free-range poultry to help prevent potential bacterial infection.

A 2012 study by Johns Hopkins University researchers also found that chicken meat bought from supermarkets showed traces of arsenic-based drugs, painkillers, antibiotics and antidepressants. Traces of caffeine and Prozac were also found in samples. High levels of arsenic exposure were tied to increased risk of cancer. The findings were published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.

Super foods to naturally combat UTIs

Natural remedies including berries, tubers and leafy vegetables may help keep urinary tract infection at bay. HealWithFood.Org has created a list of top 10 foods that may help prevent the onset of a UTI.

1. Cranberries and cranberry juice
While it is still unclear how cranberries fight the infection, experts infer that the flavonols in these tart berries prevent bacteria from attaching to the bladder.
2. Blueberries
Much like cranberries, blueberries have been found to keep UTIs from recurring. Blueberries also provide an overall health boost.
3. Water
Fluid intake plays a key role in preventing UTI onset. Adequate water consumption helps keep the infection at bay.
4. Cinnamon
This fragrant spice has shown strong antibacterial and antifungal properties, making it a good staple in preventing UTIs.
5. Sweet potatoes
These tubers are an excellent source of beta-carotene, which provides sufficient protection against UTI.
6. Carrots
Like sweet potatoes, carrots contain very high concentrations of beta-carotine, a nutrient known to prevent UTIs. They are also packed full of other nutrients to help with overall health.
7. Kale
Kale contains high levels of beta-carotene, which is an anti-UTI carotenoid. This makes it an ideal food to prevent the recurrence of infection.
8. Horseradish
The pungent chemical allyl isothiocyanate found in horseradish is known to be a potent antibacterial.
9. Rosehips
Rosehips are also known to prevent a wide array of diseases.
10. Yogurt

The probiotics in yogurts were found to be effective in preventing the onset of UTIs. A study in Finland revealed that women who consumed dairy products containing probiotics had lower odds of recurring UTIs than those who did not. (Visit Remedies.news for more information about these natural UTI remedies.)

Trump faces challenge of visa overstays, the largest source of illegal immigration

by Josh Siegle

As President Donald Trump focuses on border security in his initial actions to counter illegal immigration, a new report shows the unauthorized population increasingly is made up of those who first entered the U.S. legally.

In each year from 2007 to 2014, the report from the Center for Migration Studies finds, more people joined the undocumented immigrant population by remaining in the U.S. after their temporary visitor permits expired than by sneaking across the Mexican border.

In 2014, about 4.5 million U.S. residents, or 42 percent of the population of roughly 11 million undocumented immigrants, had overstayed their visas, the report says.

Overstays accounted for about two-thirds—66 percent—of those who ended up joining the undocumented immigrant population in 2014.

“What’s happened is that popular conception has made it seem that illegal immigration means people coming from the southern border,” Robert Warren, a co-author of the report, said in an interview with The Daily Signal. “One of the reasons we put the report out is that illegal immigration is much more varied and we need to look at different policy options.”

Visa overstays—legal entrants to the U.S. who stay past their allotted time here—long have been the underreported component of illegal immigration.
A report by the Department of Homeland Security found that as of Jan. 4, 2016, a total of 416,500 of the 527,127 overstays in 2015 remained in the U.S. More have left the country since then, the government said.

The Trump administration has referred to visa overstays, but so far has concentrated on fulfilling the president’s campaign promise to build a wall across the southern border.

“There’s this assumption in the Trump administration that the southern border is out of control and people are flooding across it, but we have much better control of the border now than we did in previous decades,” Edward Alden, an immigration and visa policy expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, said in an interview with The Daily Signal. “Whereas this other problem of visa overstays is increasingly becoming out of control.”
‘Shining a Light’

Trump’s revised executive order temporarily banning travel from six terrorism-prone, Muslim-majority countries contains some language related to combating visa overstays.

The president calls for Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly to pursue “expedited completion” of a long-promised and delayed system to obtain biometric data—such as fingerprints, facial recognition images, and eye scans—on those leaving the country. Such a system would tell the government who has left the country, and how many who should have departed are still here.

In 2004, the 9/11 Commission recommended the Department of Homeland Security complete an entry and exit system “as soon as possible,” viewing it as an important national security tool because two of the hijackers on Sept. 11, 2001, had overstayed their visas.

Foreigners who apply to enter the U.S. on a visa are interviewed and photographed and have their fingerprints taken at a consulate overseas before arriving here. But collecting biometric data on those exiting the country is not as easy.

Plagued by financial and logistical challenges, the government has introduced various pilot projects at some airports and land borders, but has struggled to implement a biometric exit system on a large scale.

Trump’s executive order asks Kelly to provide ongoing reports on the progress of an entry-exit system, but it does not impose a concrete timetable for completion.

“For a long time, administrations didn’t take the visa overstay issue seriously,” Mark Krikorian, director of the Center for Immigration Studies, said in an interview with The Daily Signal. “Hopefully with the White House’s light shining on the issue, we will see more progress on the entry-exit system, but it’s the kind of thing that will take a while. It’s a process, not an event like the border wall is.”

The Center for Immigration Studies, which calls for tougher enforcement of immigration laws, supports construction of the wall.

Shift in Behavior

The report from the Center for Migration Studies, which opposes the border wall, concludes that the biggest reason for the shift since 2007 toward more visa overstays, and fewer border-crossers, is the significant drop in illegal arrivals from Mexico in that time frame.

Mexico is the leading country for both overstays and arrivals across the border, representing about 55 percent of the undocumented immigrant population, the study says.

But U.S. border apprehensions of Mexicans has fallen sharply, from 809,000 in 2007 to just 230,000 in fiscal year 2014—a level not seen since 1971, according to the Pew Research Center.

Alden, of the Council on Foreign Relations, argues that the trend toward an increasing percent of visa overstays and fewer border apprehensions of Mexicans shows that the Trump administration should not focus on building a wall — especially at a cost estimated to be as high as $25 billion.

“It doesn’t make a lot of sense to be spending most of our money fortifying the part of the border under the best control and ignoring visa overstays, which is getting worse,” Alden said.

But Krikorian counters that the Trump administration can have multiple focuses. He says the deterrent force of a wall is important.

Yes, it does cost a great deal of money, and yes, for me, it’s not job No. 1 in a policy sense. But in a broader political sense it sends an important signal that the government is actually serious about illegal immigration control.

Trump’s early clampdown and rhetoric on illegal immigration may be having an impact. Roughly 840 people a day were caught illegally entering the U.S. from Mexico last month, according to Customs and Border Protection, a drop of about 39 percent from January.

“If the wall doesn’t go beyond being a symbol, and it just becomes an excuse to avoid doing those other things—like stopping overstays—than we have a problem,” Krikorian said. “I don’t get that sense from this administration.”

Policy Options

Beyond finishing the biometric entry-exit system, experts say there are quicker ways the Trump administration can tackle visa overstays.

The government also can take simpler steps to deter visa overstays by emailing reminders to foreigners of their expected departure date, specifying the consequences of not leaving on time.

Many who overstay their visas don’t intend to settle in America, Alden said, and simply don’t know when they have to leave.

“The biometric entry-exit system has been the unreachable holy grail,” Alden said. “But it doesn’t really get at the real problem. The problem is not an identification problem. The question is how do we discourage the act of overstaying a visa in the first place.”

Mexico should confront its xenophobic past

It’s past time for an apology to the Chinese-Mexican community

by Antonio C. Hsiang

Mexico has recently been on the receiving end of an ugly wave of xenophobia from some American politicians and members of the public.

In response, Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto, standing in solidarity with his country’s diaspora, made it a point to personally receive 135 deported Mexican nationals on February 7. Mr. Peña Nieto declared at the airport, “You are not alone, do not feel abandoned. The doors to this, your house, will always be open.”

The president’s gesture was likely designed to portray Mexico as a principled and moral country. If this was indeed Mr. Peña Nieto’s goal, then perhaps it is an opportune time for Mexico to confront its own historical responsibility for xenophobic and exclusionary policies.

Almost a century ago, Mexico experienced a dramatic rise in xenophobia against immigrants from China, resulting in exclusionary policies and outright violence. Given the fraught political climate today, it is long past time for the Mexican government to apologize to the Chinese-Mexican community.

Doing so would not only help heal deep historical wounds, it would lay the foundations for a stronger Mexican foreign policy going forward.

Mexico has an oft-ignored history of discriminating against Chinese immigrants. “Chinese-Mexicans are nearly absent from the Mexican national narrative,” according to Grace Peña Delgado, professor at UC Santa Cruz.

An anti-Chinese movement emerged during the Mexican Revolution and attained peak influence before and during the Great Depression. While most of Mexico’s anti-Chinese groups were formed between 1922 and 1927, with names such as the Comité Pro-Raza, Comité Anti-Chino de Sinaloa and the Liga Nacional Obrera Antichina, there was a significant amount of animosity against the Chinese prior to the 1920s.

Perhaps the most violent single episode occurred in 1911, when Mexican revolutionary forces massacred over 300 people of Chinese descent in the city of Torreón.

Popular Mexican politicians of the time often fanned the flames of xenophobia. For example, as one of the most prominent national politicians of the era, Plutarco Elías Calles had held strong antichinista leanings since his days as a Sonoran state politician.

He was known as the Maximato, and his powerful position made it easier to expel Chinese with impunity. Not only did he support a special tax on Chinese farmers and merchants in the agricultural towns around the capital, he denied reentry permits to those people of Chinese descent who had traveled to China.

Later, in 1931, his son, Rodolfo Elías Calles, assumed the governorship of Sonora and formed “rural brigades” to search for Chinese hiding in the countryside. Mere association with the Chinese community was enough for these vigilantes to act, and among the victims were many Mexican women married to Chinese men.

As a result of the violence and discrimination, Mexico witnessed a mass exodus of people of Chinese descent. Some 70% of Chinese-Mexicans were expelled to China or, ironically, the United States. While repatriation efforts began almost immediately and lasted until the 1980s, the legacy of the hatred is hard to erase.

A formal Mexican government apology at this particular moment can achieve multiple purposes. First, it would strengthen Mexico’s moral argument in lobbying for immigration reform in the United States. After being elected as president, Mr. Peña Nieto argued that he “would welcome the implementation of comprehensive immigration reform in the United States.”

Should he choose to make amends for a particularly xenophobic period of Mexican history, Mr. Peña Nieto would pose a powerful moral challenge to American President Donald Trump to take immigration reform seriously.

Second, such a gesture would be good global statesmanship. An apology would display a commitment to liberal values while at the same time signal a greater level of friendliness towards China.

It would also be in keeping with Mr. Peña Nieto’s own views, having stated that he “intend[s] to start a new era of economic and political cooperation with the Asia-Pacific region.”

In some ways, Mr. Peña Nieto would be following in the footsteps of his NAFTA counterparts. In 2006, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper offered a full apology to Chinese-Canadians for the Head Tax and expressed his deepest sorrow for the subsequent exclusion of Chinese immigrants from 1923 until 1947.
Similarly, in October of 2011, the U.S. Senate approved a resolution apologizing for past discriminatory laws that exclusively targeted Chinese immigrants, in particular the notorious Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. In June of 2012, the U.S. House of the Representatives also passed a resolution expressing regret for past discriminatory laws. This apology came on a resolution sponsored by Rep. Judy Chu (Democrat-Calif.), the first Chinese-American woman elected to Congress.

Making amends for Mexico’s xenophobic past can pay dividends for the country’s future relations with China. As a gesture of goodwill, it can be sold domestically as a sort of prepaid “pilón.”

There is a neat historical symmetry here. Historically, pilón has been an important part of Chinese businesses in Sonora. It refers to the tip of a cone of piloncillo, or brown sugar in a crystallized form.

Chinese business owners in Sonora regularly gave their customers some sort of pilón or small gift with a purchase. Over time, it became a metaphor for something above and beyond the expected: “un detalle” (a little extra), in the words of some Sonorans.

The Sino-Mexican relationship is one with high stakes. An apology served as pilón may be a small price to pay in order to advance Mexico’s moral standing in the world and economic interests with China.

The writer graduated from Intituto Militar de Estudios Superiores, Uruguay, obtained an MA in Latin American Studies from New York University, and an MA in Political Economy and Ph.D in Political Sciences from Claremont Graduate University. Currently he is professor and director of the Center for Latin American Economy and Trade Studies at Chihlee University of Technology, Taiwan.

Mexico-US treaty invalid, politician claims

by the El Reportero’s wire services

The deterioration in relations between Mexico and the United States has triggered a couple of claims over the countries’ common border, one of which would put into question the ownership of five U.S. states and parts of four others.

A prominent Mexican politician and a lawyer yesterday proposed a legal claim that would invalidate the treaty with which Mexico surrendered half its territory to the United States.

Former Mexico City mayor and three-time presidential candidate Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas and lawyer Guillermo Hamdan Castro argue that the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo fails several tests as to its validity.

The treaty gave the U.S. what is now California, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada and Utah and parts of Colorado, Wyoming, Kansas and Oklahoma.

Hamdan said during a presentation in Cuernavaca, Morelos, yesterday that the most important element is in the accord’s first sentence, which contains an admission that the U.S. army invaded Mexico. Signing an agreement in that context renders it null, he said.

Another legal factor is that the agreement ceding Mexico’s territory was signed under pressure.

Hamdan conceded it would be impossible for Mexico to recover the lost territory should the legal claim be upheld, but suggested instead the U.S. should pay compensation for the use of the land over the last 168 years.

But given that the dollar “has meant nothing since the 1970s,” he observed, payment should be in gold or pesos. No amount was stated.

Cárdenas, a founder of the leftist Democratic Revolution Party, and Hamdan are calling on Mexicans to join them in a march to Los Pinos, official residence of President Enrique Peña Nieto, to present the proposal.

Hamdan said the president is the only person who can take the claim before the International Court of Justice.

The second claim is that 430 kilometers of the border was incorrectly marked, meaning that about 85,000 hectares now in Arizona and New Mexico actually belong to Mexico.

The claim has been made by Senator Patricio Martínez, a former governor of Chihuahua, who discovered the mistake in the 1990s. In the mid-19th century, he said, piles of stones were used to mark the border.

But towards the end of the century Mexico found the cairns had been destroyed and parts of the border marked too far south, according to a report today by the Financial Times.

Martínez’ discovery was based on an engineer’s report. A second study conducted since has confirmed the finding, he said. Now he plans to file a motion in the Senate to have the mistake corrected.

He said the matter was raised by Mexico in a letter to the Secretary of State in 1897, but was subsequently forgotten.

Source: El Universal (sp), Financial Times (eng)