Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon) on Wednesday joined a bipartisan group of colleagues in sending a letter to the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) and Ranking Member Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), urging them to hold a legislative hearing on S. 1152, the Secure And Fair Enforcement (SAFE) Banking Act, which would allow cannabis and cannabis-related businesses that are legal under state law to access financial services in the banking system and give law enforcement the ability to monitor these transactions.

“As of today, twenty-nine states, the District of Columbia and various U.S. Territories have enacted legislation allowing for either medical or adult-use of cannabis. An additional seventeen states allow for limited medical use,” wrote the senators. “While the February 2014 Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) guidelines offer some clarity to financial institutions that are offering financial services to cannabis businesses, these institutions are forced to operate in an uncertain legal environment.”

The senators continued, “Holding a legislative hearing on S. 1152, the SAFE Banking Act, would offer members of the Senate Committee of Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs an opportunity to question witnesses who have various perspectives and experience in financial services for the cannabis industry. As more states are considering legislation to legalize cannabis for medical and adult-use, it is critical that this Committee examine the financial sector’s role in serving the growing cannabis industry.”

Merkley is the lead sponsor of the SAFE Banking Act, which he wrote after hearing from legal cannabis and cannabis-related businesses in Oregon that were struggling to find banking services after Oregon legalized recreational marijuana in 2014. The lack of banking services has forced many businesses to operate in all-cash, which endangers community safety by making these businesses a target for crime and robbery, and makes it more difficult to trace money laundering and track whether businesses are fully paying the taxes they owe.

The letter was signed by U.S. Senators Catherine Cortez-Masto (D-Nev.), Cory Gardner (R-Colo.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Michael Bennet (D-Colo.).

A full copy of the letter can be found below.

Dear Chairman Crapo and Ranking Member Brown:

We respectfully request that you hold a legislative hearing on S. 1152, the Secure And Fair Enforcement (SAFE) Banking Act. A legislative hearing would provide members of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs the opportunity to question witnesses on the proposed bipartisan legislation. It would also allow for a better understanding of the current state of financial services for cannabis-related businesses, the need for legal certainty for financial institutions, and other important issues relating to financial services and the cannabis industry.

As of today, twenty-nine states, the District of Columbia and various U.S. Territories have enacted legislation allowing for either medical or adult-use of cannabis.  An additional seventeen states allow for limited medical use. Currently, financial institutions, both state- and federally-chartered, are operating under guidance issued in February 2014 by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) for cannabis related businesses.  While the February 2014 guidance offers some clarity to financial institutions that are offering financial services to cannabis businesses, these institutions are forced to operate in an uncertain legal environment.

Additionally, cannabis and cannabis-related businesses, such as landlords and security companies, have had limited access to or are locked out of the banking system, including accessing a checking account, meeting payroll and paying tax revenue, among other financial services. In an industry conducting hundreds of millions of dollars in transactions, the lack of access to financial services has forced many to operate as cash only businesses, raising concerns regarding public safety, money laundering, and other potential crimes.

A hearing would give members the opportunity to hear directly from witnesses who have direct experience with the challenges facing the financial sector, the cannabis industry, and law enforcement. Witnesses should include representatives from the cannabis industry, financial institutions, state and federal banking regulators, and law enforcement.  Recently, a bipartisan group of nineteen state attorneys general wrote a letter calling on Congress to consider legislation, such as the SAFE Banking Act, which would harmonize state and federal law regarding financial services for the cannabis industry and give law enforcement the ability to monitor these transactions, while respecting the rights of states.

Holding a legislative hearing on S. 1152, the SAFE Banking Act, would offer members of the Senate Committee of Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs an opportunity to question witnesses who have various perspectives and experience in financial services for the cannabis industry. More than half of the states in our country allow for medical or adult-use of cannabis. As more states are considering legislation to legalize cannabis for medical and adult-use, it is critical that this Committee examine the financial sector’s role in serving the growing cannabis industry.

Thank you for your consideration of our request.

Investing in education may help boost economic opportunities for the next generation, according to a team of economists.

In a study, researchers suggest that investing in public education can lead to more upward economic mobility and lower teen pregnancy rates, as well as provide a way to ease income inequality.

“It’s something we’ve long suspected, but this study really confirms that there’s a strong link between the quality of the schools you go to and the opportunities you have later in life,” said Stephan Goetz, professor of agricultural and regional economics, Penn State and director of the Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development. “The better your school, the better your economic opportunities.”

The study, which focused on public spending in education and returns from education, as well as taxation, indicated that communities that invested more in education had lower drop-out rates and fewer teen pregnancies.

The researchers, who released their findings in a recent issue of Economic Development Quarterly, added that reducing the high school dropout rate had nearly twice the beneficial effect on upward mobility as on reducing teen birth rates.

According to the researchers, poor school quality can lead to a cascade of economic and social ills. For example, the lower the school quality, the higher the dropout rate, which can lead to higher numbers of teen pregnancies, said Goetz.

“Because the dropout rate negatively affects both teen birth rates and absolute upward mobility, this shows that school quality not only has short-term impacts on educational outcomes, but also has long-term impacts on children’s success as adults,” said Goetz.

The researchers also said that, often, the only way up economically for young people in rural communities is to move out.

“One finding — that rural young people rely on moving out of the area to move up in the income rankings — presents a challenge for policy makers who not only care about prosperity for people, but also for places,” said Minghao Li, a former graduate student in rural agricultural, environmental and regional economics, Penn State, and now a postdoctoral researcher at Iowa State. “To be able to retain talented children, rural areas need to create high-skilled jobs and favorable environments for start-up entrepreneurs.”

Mobility varies throughout the nation, according to the researchers. For example, upward mobility is higher in the Rocky Mountains and Plains regions and in portions of Oklahoma and Texas, while it is lower in the Northeast and Far West.

The researchers used data from federal income tax records, the Historical Database on Individual Government Finances, the Local Education Agency Finance Survey from 1991 to 2000, theAmerican Community Survey from 2006 to 2010, and County Business Patterns.

By Osama Al-Sharif*

The revelation that Facebook allowed a British data company to harvest the personal information of no fewer than 50 million users, which it may have used to influence voters in the US presidential election and the Brexit referendum, has reverberated around the world. This was not only a clear breach of privacy, but also troubling evidence that democratic processes can be affected, if not managed, through data released by such platforms.

Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, once described Facebook as the “most appalling spy machine” in history. One can appreciate this statement in light of the fact that Facebook now has more than 2.2 billion monthly active users around the globe.

Facebook has apologized to users and vowed to protect their personal information in the future. And despite calls, mostly in the West, to boycott the platform, it is hard to believe that Facebook will collapse or disappear as a result of this scandal. There have been other reports alleging that Facebook has been tracking users’ cell phones, including monitoring their call and browsing history. It is fair to say that such violations of privacy are not limited to Facebook. Other platforms and applications track, save and sell users’ information. How such information is used is an open question, but we now know that Facebook users’ profiles were accessed by Cambridge Analytica, a company working for Donald Trump’s election campaign back in 2016.

The latest scandal is the tip of the iceberg. For years experts have warned that IT companies such as Google harvest and allow access to users’ personal information. The privacy issue is important but the fact that these companies are able to personalize what we see on the internet in terms of news, views and even advertising is a serious problem. With the fake news factor in play in recent years, one can imagine how such platforms are able to shape and influence public opinion. We are just learning about Russia’s role in influencing the US presidential election through fake accounts that disseminated either false news or biased information. The British government is now investigating the role Cambridge Analytica may have played in influencing the Brexit referendum.

One cannot rule out the possibility that governments may be accessing citizens’ personal data as well — this is a Big Brother scenario that is entirely possible in this day and age. Our digital trail is impossible to delete and technology has allowed governments and organizations to harvest and catalogue personal information belonging to tens of millions of people.

But what should worry democratic governments around the world is the fact that such breaches of trust by social media platforms can lead to a vile attack on democracy. Fake news is only part of the challenge. The ability of foreign governments to access such personal information and influence voters, as in the case of Britain, France and the US, is another form of cyber warfare. And while laws and regulations will certainly be tightened by Western governments to criminalize such breaches and manipulations, one must ask what we in the Arab world are doing about it?

It is important to point out that the Facebook case is the latest in a series of challenges and risks that users face as they venture into the virtual space. Governments, like individual users, are also at risk of losing control of state secrets and other sensitive data. It is fair to ask if governments in this part of the world have a strategy or plan to protect themselves from hackers that could include unfriendly states.

With almost every activity of our lives going digital, one can only wonder how personal data is stored and protected. Whether access is allowed, as in the case of Facebook, or hacked, it is now a fact that sinister powers can and will abuse personal data.

Meanwhile, it is interesting to note that reaction to the Facebook scandal was muted in our region. Users appear to be willing to remain hooked to social media platforms no matter the risk. One can only assume that such addiction has to do with political reality in most Arab countries: The less freedom of expression there is in the real world, the higher the addiction to Facebook and Twitter. Those platforms offer people the chance to express themselves in the virtual space in stark contrast to existing political conditions. And, as traditional media becomes more restricted, people will flock to social media, where they feel free to have their say. That does not mean that people will not be held accountable for opinions and views expressed online. As we have seen, governments are enacting laws to restrict freedom of expression on the internet through cybercrime laws.

Lessons from the Facebook incident must be learned by individuals, governments and organizations alike. The digital age has changed our lives in many ways, but what seems like a luxury or even a right can also become a liability and a challenge.

• Osama Al-Sharif is a journalist and political commentator in Amman. Twitter: @plato010

Italy’s envoy to the United Nations Sebastiano Cardi said Iran is playing an important role in the region, and Rome is willing to cooperate with Tehran on war against terrorism, IRNA reports.

In an interview, the Italian envoy said on Monday, March 26: “Fighting terrorism is a matter of common consensus, we will have a high-level meeting in June at the UN” that was called by Under-Secretary for the new United Nations Counter-Terrorism Office Vladimir Ivanovich Voronkov.

”Iran is a part of international community, it is a responsible part”, he said, adding that “it will, and can play, a very important role to fight terrorism together with the others.”

“So Italy has always had a very deep relation with Iran and we look forward to cooperating with Iran also on the issue,” he said.

Commenting on the continuation of the nuclear deal Iran has signed with major world powers in 2015, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), he said. “As far as the European Union is concerned, we have repeatedly, and Federica Mogherini who represent us in the deal, said it very clearly that we wish the agreement to stay.”

By Hareez Lee, Fadzil Aziz, Hadi Azmi and N. Nantha

Malaysia’s parliament swiftly approved a new electoral map Wednesday amid howls of protest from opposition lawmakers and activists who said it favored Prime Minister Najib Razak’s ruling coalition in upcoming polls.

In total, 129 lawmakers voted for and 80 voted against a bill allowing for the redrawing of electoral boundaries that was bulldozed through parliament and expected to take effect just in time for the 14th General Election, which must be called by August.

Malaysia’s king must still approve the motion, after which Najib is expected to seek his permission to dissolve parliament and announce a date for the election.

Prominent electoral reform activist S. Ambiga described the move as “cheating the people and an act of challenging democracy.”

“We cannot allow that. Why they are rushing the report through,” she told reporters during a protest outside parliament, referring to a document detailing the changes to the electoral map that was produced by the nation’s Election Commission (EC) and submitted to the legislature.

Lawmakers held a chaotic debate on the measure in parliament late Wednesday in front of Speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia, who abruptly suspended senior opposition leader Lim Kit Siang for six months for speaking out of turn.

In introducing the bill, Prime Minister Najib Razak told the House that the redistricting would not produce any new seats but would change the boundaries and names of some existing districts.

He said redistricting was needed because the electoral map had last been drawn up in 2003, and due to “the different topography and demography of rural areas.”

“This had indirectly posed restrictions in terms of connectivity and transportation,” Najib said.

“This problem had caused far higher concentration of population in the urban areas compared to the rural.”

Most supporters of the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition are in rural areas, especially villages built for low-income Malays as part of a decades-old development scheme targeting Malaysia’s ethnic majority.

“The government did not interfere nor had any influence [on the] EC in executing their duties. The government … respects all decisions made by the commission, for the benefit of all and for the interest of the rakyat [the people] and our country,” Najib said.

Bigger districts

The new electoral map appears to pack more voters into districts currently held by the opposition.

For example, it renames the Petaling Jaya Utara seat in opposition-held Selangor state and enlarges it from 84,456 to 150,439 voters, making it the largest constituency in Peninsular Malaysia.

Meanwhile, the Kuala Lumpur Lembah Pantai seat, held by the daughter of jailed de facto opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, now includes the federal police headquarters Bukit Aman, adding at least additional 6,000 votes, although the two areas are not geographically adjacent.

Anwar’s daughter, Nurul Izzah, won the seat in 2013 by 1,847 votes, ousting a former government minister in a shock upset.

Other changes included renaming 12 parliamentary and 28 state seats.

Malays and other indigenous groups account for nearly 70 percent of Malaysia’s population of 31 million, with ethnic Chinese making up 23 percent and ethnic Indians and others the remainder.

Most of the Malaysian political parties are race-based, including Najib’s United Malays National Organization (UMNO), the linchpin of the ruling BN coalition.

‘Tyranny’

Earlier in the day, about 1, 000 people clad in yellow T-shirts of the electoral reform movement Bersih marched towards parliament, led by former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad. He had abandoned the ruling party in 2016, saying it was shielding Najib from corruption allegations.

Mahathir said BN had “bulldozed” through the proposal without giving adequate space for it to be debated.

“The law needs more time to be debated. This law is only for the general election,” Mahathir said commenting on the half-day given to debate around the redrawing of electoral boundaries.

“This is a form of tyranny,” he added.

Mahathir has been named as the choice for prime minister by the opposition Pakatan Harapan coalition should it expand its share of seats from 90 to a simple majority of 112 or more.

The suspended opposition leader Lim, a Batu Pahat parliamentarian and advisor of the Democratic Action Party (DAP), had questioned Pandikar’s decision to prevent the redistricting proposal from being made public when it was handed to parliamentarians last week.

In a press conference shortly after the bill was passed, Lim said the redistricting was aimed at protecting Najib and his ruling coalition.

“Today the parliament voted for a motion to protect Najib and BN, tomorrow it will vote to protect Najib from 1MDB with the fake news law. The choice is in the voter’s hand whether to allow for this to succeed,” he told reporters.

A bill introduced in parliament on Monday would make spreading fake news a crime punishable by up to 10 years in prison.

1MDB affair

Najib could be facing his toughest electoral battle yet due to a massive corruption scandal involving a state-owned investment fund, 1MDB. The ruling BN coalition lost its super majority in 2008 and saw its majority further trimmed in 2013.

The 1MDB affair has spawned international investigations and most recently the seizure of a mega-yacht allegedly purchased with funds stolen from 1MDB by Malaysian tycoon Low Taek Jho, the main target of a U.S. government money-laundering investigation.

Najib has acknowledged receiving close to U.S. $681 million in his personal bank accounts just before the 2013 election, but said the money was a political donation from Saudi Arabia’s royal family. The prime minister and 1MDB officials have denied the embezzlement allegations.

The controversy over the 1MDB scandal has stoked negative opinion polls against Najib since 2015, but the opposition has struggled to make a serious dent in Najib’s rural support, according to analysts.

Mahathir’s new party, Bersatu, is focusing on gaining the votes of the ethnic Malay Muslim majority, its president, Muhyiddin Yassin, told BenarNews earlier this month.

“Our strategy is to pull the support from Malays who used to support BN and especially UMNO,” he said, noting that in 2013 the opposition won 52 percent of the popular vote but was still unable to form a government.

“I believe if there is a 5 percent move, to maybe 55 percent or 57 percent, which is highly likely to happen especially among the Malays, the win will be for Pakatan Harapan,” he said.

Earlier this month, Najib’s government began distributing about U.S. $1.6 billion to millions of low-income citizens as part of a government plan to spur economic growth, but critics slammed the move as vote-buying ahead of the general election.

Rights groups have accused former Sri Lankan president Mahinda Rajapaksa and his supporters of being behind recent anti-Muslim riots.

Attacks on Muslims took place immediately after local council elections contested by Rajapaksa’s newly formed Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP).

The government on March 6 declared a nationwide state of emergency after two people were killed and nearly 450 Muslim homes and shops were damaged in the central Kandy region.

During the violence, more than 20 mosques were attacked.

The death of a Sinhalese lorry driver was said to have triggered the mayhem, but there were tensions in southeastern Ampara beforehand.

Anti-Muslim violence likewise erupted after rumors that birth control pills were being served in Muslim restaurants to Sinhalese customers.

Although the claim was false, it inflamed fears of a conspiracy to reduce the Sinhalese population.

Cadar Nijam, a human rights activist and local council member, said CCTV footage highlighted the role of SLPP members.

SLPP member Gamini Rajapaksa and several supporters were arrested following examination of camera recordings of an attack on the Manikhinna mosque.

“SLPP members joined with the mobs to get political advantage,” said Nijam, who is from Kandy.

Other SLPP members and supporters involved had still not been arrested.

The police should arrest big-name politicians who engineered the unrest, Nijam said, but he added victims suspected the instigators were being protected by police.

He urged Muslims to come forward with more video or other evidence relating to the attacks.

The human rights defender said Rajapaksa’s regime had used Buddhist extremist groups in an attempt to retain power. However, the dangerous repercussions were now evident.

In recent years, hard-line Buddhist groups including Mahasohon Balakaya and Bodu Bala Sena have preached hatred against the Muslim population.

Muslim religious leaders have handed over a document to the parliament calling for measures to avoid further anti-Muslim attacks.

Cabinet spokesperson Rajitha Senaratne said two Buddhist monks had been arrested in connection with the violence.

Some victims said a lethargic police response allowed Sinhalese Buddhist mobs to create havoc.

Rajapaksa denied that his party was involved.

Meanwhile, Bodu Bala Sena general secretary Galagoda Aththe Gnanasara Thera visited arrested activists last weekend.

Catholic priest Father Nandana Manathunga, director of Kandy’s Human Rights Office, said the rioting did not come as a surprise.

The office of militant Mahasohon Balakaya was well established in Kandy.

“This was a well-organized attack and their activities were happening for a long time,” said Father Nandana.

Both Mahasohon Balakaya and Bodu Bala Sena were created and funded by politicians, he said.

Buddhist activists knew the religions of villagers, he added. “Several times I informed police about these groups,” the priest said.

A sign proclaiming Mahasohon Balakaya’s general secretariat was removed after the rioting. “But they still exist,” Father Nandana said.

The European Commission  on Wednesday proposed to make cross-border payments in euro cheaper across the entire EU. Under current rules, there is no difference for euro area residents or businesses if they carry out euro transactions in their own country or with another euro area Member State.

The proposal aims to extend this benefit to people and businesses in non-euro countries. This will allow all consumers and businesses to fully reap the benefits of the Single Market when they send money, withdraw cash or pay abroad. All intra-EU cross-border payments in euro outside the euro area will now be priced the same – with small or zero fees – as domestic payments in the local official currency.

Moreover, the Commission is proposing to bring more transparency and competition to currency conversion services when consumers are buying goods or services in a different currency than their own.

Valdis Dombrovskis, Vice-President responsible for Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union, said, “With today’s proposal we are granting citizens and businesses in non-euro area countries the same conditions as euro area residents when making cross-border payments in euro. All Europeans will be able to transfer money cross-border, in euro, at the same cost as they would pay for a domestic transaction. Today’s proposal will also require full transparency in currency conversion when consumers are paying by card in a country which does not have the same currency as their own.”

Consumers and businesses in the euro area already benefit from very low fees for cross-border payments in euro, thanks to the introduction of the cross-border payments regulation in 2001. Under current rules, there is no difference for euro area residents or businesses if they carry out euro transactions in their own country or with another euro area Member State.

The proposal aims to extend this benefit to people and businesses in non-euro countries whenever they travel or pay abroad, putting an end to the high cost of intra-EU cross-border transactions in euro.

In particular, this proposal provides that fees charged for cross-border payments in euro are the same that would be charged for equivalent domestic payments in the local currency. This will bring down fees to a few euro or even cents. For example, a cross-border credit transfer in euro (EUR) from Bulgaria will be priced the same as a domestic Bulgarian lev (BGN) credit transfer.

This is a major change, as fees for a simple credit transfer can be exorbitant in some non-euro area Member States (up to EUR 24 for a transfer of EUR 10!). The current hefty fees are an obstacle to the Single Market as they create barriers to cross-border activities of households (buying goods or services in another currency zone) and businesses, in particular SMEs. This creates a major gap between euro area residents who benefit from the single currency, and non-euro area residents who can only make cheap transactions within their own country.

The proposal will also bring about transparency on payments that involve different Union currencies. At the moment, consumers are usually not informed or aware of the cost of a transaction that involves a currency conversion. The proposal will therefore require that consumers are fully informed of the cost of a currency conversion before they make such payment (e.g. with their card abroad, be it a cash withdrawal at an ATM or a card payment at a point of sale, or online).

This means they will be able to compare the costs of different conversion options to make a fair choice. Recent findings show that consumers have been complaining about dynamic currency conversion practices – i.e. paying abroad in their home currency – and asking for their ban after having found that they were losing out in the majority of the cases studied. The lack of necessary information to make the best choice often results in consumers being unfairly led towards the more expensive currency conversion option. The European Banking Authority will be tasked with drafting the necessary Regulatory Technical Standard to implement this enhanced transparency.

The legislative proposal will now be submitted to the European Parliament and Council for adoption.

Former Sri Lankan Ambassador to Russia Udayanga Weeratunge was arrested by Dubai authorities on Monday, Sri Lanka co-cabinet spokesman, Minister of Health, Nutrition and Indigenous Medicine Dr. Rajitha Senaratne disclosed Wednesday.

Answering questions raised by a journalist a the weekly cabinet press briefing held at the Department of Government Information auditorium, the minister said that government officials are now in discussion with the Dubai authorities with regard to handing Weeratunga over to the Sri Lankan authorities.

On March 16, the Colombo Fort Magistrate’s Court issued an open warrant for the arrest former diplomat, who is absconding, to be executed through Interpol.

The warrant called for his arrest and to produce the suspect before the court immediately.

Interpol last month issued a Red Notice on the former Sri Lankan Ambassador, as a person wanted by the Sri Lankan authorities.

Weeratunga had been evading a warrant of arrest issued on October 20, 2016 by a Colombo Magistrate, in relation to investigations pertaining to alleged embezzlement of public funds to the tune of 7.833 million US dollars with regard to procurement of MiG aircraft and money laundering.

On the basis of a Blue Notice obtained by Interpol Sri Lanka on Mr. Weeratunga, Sri Lanka authorities had been working through mutual legal assistance with a number of countries to trace his whereabouts.

The former Ambassador to Russia and Ukraine was intercepted in the UAE on Sunday February 4, 2018 when he attempted to leave to the United States.

However, he was subsequently released by the UAE authorities, but was prevented from leaving the territory of the UAE until the conclusion of investigations.

By Mary Rezac

A recent study shows that when it comes to upward economic mobility, family and community makes a notable difference in the lives of black boys.

The study found that significant gaps exist between black and white boys when it comes to upward economic mobility throughout their lifetimes, while these differences are nearly non-existent between black and white girls.

While racism is widely considered to be a factor in that economic disparity between white and black boys, numerous other factors are also at play, according to the study conducted by researchers Raj Chetty, Nathaniel Hendren, Maggie Jones, and Sonya Porter at The Equality of Opportunity Project.

Black boys on the whole face an upward economic mobility gap even when raised in similar neighborhoods, families and income levels as white boys, the study found.

But the study found one notable exception – black boys from impoverished neighborhoods do as well as white boys from similar neighborhoods when there are a lot of black fathers and married couples present in the community. The study found that the presence of fathers matters at a community level, meaning that even black boys without resident fathers did as well as white boys, if they came from communities with high concentrations of black fathers and married couples.

“That is a pathbreaking finding,” William Julius Wilson, a Harvard sociologist who studies economic struggles of black men, told the New York Times. “They’re not talking about the direct effects of a boy’s own parents’ marital status. They’re talking about the presence of fathers in a given census tract.”

Some responses to the study have claimed that family structure matters minimally for the upward mobility of black boys. However, Dr. Bradford Wilcox, director of the National Marriage Project and professor of sociology at the University of Virginia, told CNA that those takes ignore this important finding about marriage structure at the neighborhood level.

Those “are obviously two important family structure indicators that matter at the neighborhood level, so the point there is it’s not just what happens in the individual households, but what’s sort of happening to the family in your neighborhood or your community that would seem to matter for mobility,” Wilcox told CNA.

Wilcox also noted in an article on the study that on the whole, young black men are much more likely to be raised in single-parent homes than young white men, so “if you control for household income growing up, you miss the ways in which racial differences in family structure affect outcomes for boys via their impact on family income.”

Furthermore, the study compares the household income of black boys to their individual income as grown men. Wilcox said a more accurate comparison would be to compare the household income of black boys to the household income of those same boys when they reach adulthood, in order to measure the impact that marriage and family structure continues to have on income.

“I think you would find a very different story, because as they note in the study, blacks marry at much lower levels than do whites, and…you do find that the family structure plays a major role in accounting for the contemporary family income gap, or household income gap between blacks and whites today,” he said.

Bishop Shelton Fabre, chair of United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ (USCCB) Subcommittee for African-American Catholics, told CNA that this study shows the need to support and encourage marriage and fatherhood in all communities.

“I know that its manifestation in the African American community is unique, but I think in many cultures, that the whole notion of what it means to be a father, and how to support men who are fathers, and to call men to fatherhood, I think that that’s a need,” he said, “more than just in the African American community.”

The Church can and does encourage fatherhood and married couples especially through marriage preparation programs, Fabre said, as well as Marriage Encounter retreats that support couples throughout their marriage.

Furthermore, the rise of apostolates geared toward men, such as “That Man is You”, show the growing need for providing support for fathers and men in the Christian community, Fabre noted.

“That Man is You” is a Catholic ministry for men that says it “honestly addresses the pressures and temptations that men face in our modern culture, especially those relating to their roles as husbands and fathers.”

The Church is also able to fill in some of the gaps in places where fewer fathers are present, Fabre noted, through mentorship programs at the parish level or through organizations such as the Knights of St. Peter Claver. The Knights of St. Peter Claver is the largest African American Catholic lay organization in the United States, and “provides mentorship and opportunities for young black men to come to know their faith, and that mentorship certainly would get into what does it mean to be a good father,” Fabre said.

It’s important that the Church emphasize the unique things that fathers and mothers bring to families, Fabre added.

“A mother’s love, and a mother’s example, are unique. But the role of father is unique as well. The father brings that sense of security and stability, and other things that young men need to come to know,” he said. “I think mothers provide a lot, but for a young man to have a father to guide him, and to just listen to him and bounce ideas off of him, and help him to learn from his mistakes, and to make his choice that much sweeter, I think that’s the role of a father. I think it’s because a father has a particular role, and a mother has a particular role in the family. And children need that.”

On March 27, 13 defendants went into the West Roxbury District courthouse to answer charges related to their arrests protesting the West Roxbury Massachusetts Lateral Pipeline. They expected to have charges against them reduced to civil infractions — the equivalent of a parking ticket. While finding no grounds to deny that motion from the prosecution, the judge chose to let each defendant testify briefly on the necessity of their actions.

The defendants collectively presented a powerful and comprehensive argument for why it was necessary to engage in civil disobedience to stop the imminent local and global harms of this fracked gas pipeline. Following their testimony, the judge acquitted ALL the defendants by reason of necessity.

While defendants in this case were still denied a jury trial and the possibility of presenting a full necessity defense, this was the first time that we know of that defendants were acquitted based on climate necessity. The defendants told the story of the campaign against the West Roxbury Lateral Pipeline and how their actions were justified by the threat of climate change.

Lawyers for the 13 activists suggested there may even have been a “cause and effect” – that charges were reduced in order to avoid the trial for which the defendants, their legal team, eight expert witnesses, and many supporters had prepared.

Activists said they were disappointed that they would not get the chance to present their case to a jury of their peers, but not disheartened. “The attempt to take these cases to trial was a long shot,” said Marla Marcum, co-founder of the Climate Disobedience Center and a spokesperson for the group. “As climate activists in 2018, we know that long shots and moral imagination are some of the most promising tools for culture-shifting transformation.”

With the judge dismissing the charges, the campaign was a success even without the trial. As Nathan Phillips, a professor in the Earth and Environment Department at Boston University and one of the defendants, said “We forced Spectra to admit to the judge that they did not have and do not have a safety plan for the West Roxbury Lateral pipeline and likely any projects going forward.”

The result in this case is an important part of building power to fight the fossil fuel industry. Climate justice advocates told their story not just in court but from the way they created their protest, which included “Digging Mass Graves” to highlight the dangers of climate change.

“What we stood for is true, and that truth is in the process of coming to light, regardless of the fact that the system is unable to fully hear it right now,” said Karenna Gore, daughter of former Vice President Al Gore and Director of the Center for Earth Ethics of at Union Theological Seminary in New York.

Activists continued to tell their story after the protest. See this blog from Tim DeChristopher, and by Rev. Lara Hoke. The participants consistently made the point that they restated before the court — there is an urgent necessity to stop building carbon infrastructure as climate change will kill millions of people and cause immense environmental damage.

This protest and refusal to accept a plea bargain built the movement’s power and demonstrated the violence of carbon energy infrastructure projects.

The defendants were among roughly 200 protesters who had been arrested as part of a massive campaign against this pipeline, beginning in mid 2015. Initially concerned with local  safety– the risk of locating a high pressure facility in a densely-populated neighborhood and across the street from an active blasting quarry—protesters gained support from Boston Mayor Walsh and the entire Boston City Council, Congressman Lynch, Senators Markey and Warren, State Representative Coppinger and State Senator Rush, as well as residents and officials from the Town of Dedham through which the pipeline also runs.

This is not just one protest but part of a national resistance movement for climate justice with activists taking action across the country to stop carbon energy infrastructure and extraction of oil and gas. We urge you to share this report so tens of thousands of people will see principled climate disobedience actions as one kind of necessary leadership in a time when our regulatory systems and our government are owned by the fossil fuel industry. We hope this action will inspire more people to take direct action, risk arrest, and pursue novel legal strategies.

The Climate Disobedience Center provides a guide for activists on how to use the tool of the necessity defense in climate cases. It defines climate necessity as: “The climate necessity defense is an argument made by a criminal defendant to justify action taken on behalf of the planet. It’s offered by activists who have been arrested for protesting fossil fuel extraction and government inaction on climate policy.” [Emphasis in original] The necessity defense is a long-time defense used in civil disobedience cases where activists argue that their violation of the law should not result in conviction because they were acting out of necessity to prevent a greater harm. In climate cases, the argument is the impacts of climate change are so serious that breaking the law is necessary to avert them.

The trial was supported by Climate Disobedience Center, the Massachusetts Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, Climate Defense Project, and 198 Methods.

For more information visit the Climate Disobedience Center and Stop the West Roxbury Lateral. The above report is based in part on the press release from the defendants.

Holy Week is a week of atonement for Christians, but this year it has special meaning for Keith Raniere as well: the cult guru, who exploited his women followers, was arrested by the FBI in Mexico on March 26 on charges of sex trafficking and forced labor. On March 27, the FBI raided the home of his sidekick, Nancy Salzman, in upstate New York.

Raniere, known to his minions as “The Vanguard,” ran a master-slave operation with vulnerable and morally confused women. He had sex with them over and over again, took photos and videos of them, and had one of his female workers use hot irons to brand his initials on the stomach of his woman victims, just below their pant line; it took about 30 minutes for this to be done. But not all his victims were adults: some were girls in their subteen and teenage years.

“During the branding ceremonies,” one complainant told CBS News, “slaves were required to be fully naked, and the master would order one slave to film while the other held down the slave being branded.”

Who was Raniere? According to the Niagara Falls Reporter, he was a boy genius who was able to speak in full sentences at age one, “taught himself high-school math in 19 hours when he was 12 and completed three years of college math and computer-language by the age of 13.” He graduated from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in 1982, majoring in physics, math and biology. In 1989, he made the Guinness Book of World Records for his stunning IQ, which ranged between 188 and 194.

Raniere was also a monster. He founded a self-improvement organization called NXIVM (pronounced Nex-ee-um). Originally from Brooklyn, he anchored his master-slave operation outside of Albany. The philosophical basis of his cult was drawn from many sources, including Scientology, Buddhism, Ericksonian hypnosis, humanism, and a smattering of New Age religions.

In 1990, Raniere was introduced to a 12-year-old girl by her mother, who had recently divorced. The mother called the cult guru “an Einstein,” and agreed to have her daughter tutored by him. He said he would teach her algebra and Latin. Instead, he raped her. He had sex with the girl, still wearing braces, in his townhouse and in the empty offices of his company, Consumers’ Buyline. He also raped her in an elevator and in a broom closet. All total, he violated her about 60 times.

Raniere was experienced in rape. In 1984, when he was 24, he met Gina Melita, a 15-year-old, whom he befriended. The Albany Times-Union, which has done the best work on “The Vanguard,” described what happened. “He took her virginity in a dark room, her T-shirt flecked with blood. She told him it was painful, yet a short time later, he wanted more. During their four-month relationship, he hounded the 135-pound girl to lose weight and urged her to keep their relationship secret from her mother.”

The adult women drawn to Raniere were invariably well educated and attractive. But their childhood experiences and adult relationships were troubled, leaving them distraught and ripe for abuse. He sought to own them, mentally and physically, requiring them to sign confidentiality agreements, which they did.

Some of his subjects were co-workers, such as Toni Natalie. A married woman raising an adopted son, Raniere convinced her that her husband was having an affair. He invited her to attend his childhood sexuality class, where he told his students that it was not uncommon for some tribes to perform oral sex on children to relieve their tensions.

Naturally, Raniere raped her, and each time he did, she told the Niagara Falls Reporter, he said it “was harder on him than it was on me, that we needed to be together so that I could share in his energy, and that I needed to remain silent so as to not wake up my child who was sleeping in a nearby room.”

Raniere was able to attract big time donors, none more famous that Sara and Clare Bronfman; their father, Edgar, made his fortune at Seagram. The daughters gave Raniere $100 million. They sincerely believed that their calling in life was to create world peace, turning to “The Vanguard” to lead the way.

The IQ wizard spent his life lying, cheating, ripping off his patrons, trashing women, and raping children. And he did it all in the name of ethical humanism.

It’s easy, too easy, to say Raniere was a fraud. He was much more than that: He was a brilliant and evil tactician who knew how to manipulate the weak. His entire adult life was spent dabbling in one vacuous philosophical system after another, ultimately blending them into a self-serving cult.

At bottom, Raniere thought that Jesus was irrelevant and that he had all the answers. Regrettably, he was able to convince these simple-minded and thoroughly confused women—all desperately looking for direction—that he could save them. But he saved no one. Instead, he not only savaged his followers mentally and physically, he made them pay for it, lavishly.

His day of atonement has arrived. That it has come during Holy Week is not only ironic, it is fraught with meaning. Sadly, it is one that likely escapes him.

On the inaugural day of a recent conference, Dr. Miftah Ismail Adviser to the Prime Minister on Finance and Economic Affairs said the Ministry of Finance would soon set up a separate division for the promotion of Islamic banking in Pakistan. He was the Chief Guest at a two-day World Islamic Finance Forum (WIFF-2018). The international forum was organized by Institute of Business Administration’s Centre for Excellence in Islamic Finance IBA-CIEF in collaboration with key partners. The theme was “Expanding the Footprint of Islamic Finance: Innovation, Fintech and Regulations.”

In his visionary note, Shaikh Muhammad Taqi Usmani Chairman, Shariah Board of Accounting and Auditing Organization for Islamic Financial Institutions (AAOIFI) said the people of Pakistan origin were holding key positions in Islamic banking industry around the world, making contribution in developing regulatory framework and above all developing products that would meet the emerging needs of trade and industry. He urged the government to take concrete steps for making the economy Riba (interest) free. He also pointed out that Islamic financial institutions have ample liquidity and the government should work for creating new avenues for its deployment in remunerative options. He suggested that the ruling party should also include in its election manifesto that Riba would be eradicated totally from economy at the earliest.

Chairman AAOIFI Board of Trustees, Bahrain Shaikh Ebrahim Bin Khalifa Al Khalifa said it was heartening to note that Pakistan was striving to become another hub of Islamic finance. The country has all the basic ingredients — a population of 200 million predominantly Muslims, a robust banking and finance sector, vibrant agriculture, industrial and services sectors.

On the occasion were present the top officials of the apex regulators – State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) and Securities & Exchange Commission of Pakistan, Deputy Governors of the central bank, Jameel Ahmad and Shamsul Hasan talked about the central bank’s initiatives for the to promote Islamic banking in the country. The progress made over the last decade has been encouraging that has facilitated in achieving the target. They were also of the view that making Pakistan hub of Islamic finance would not be difficult.

Irfan Siddiqui, President Meezan Bank requested the federal government to set a target to acquire at least 25 per cent of the local funding through Islamic banking as Islamic financial institutions have ample liquidity and limited avenues for investment.
In his key note address, Dr. Ishrat Husain, Chairman, IBA-CIEF talked about the progress made by Islamic banking in Pakistan. He was of the view that the progress made during last one decade was enormous but new products need to be introduced to provide fresh impetus for growth.

IBA-CEIF Director, Ahmed Ali Siddiqui, welcoming the delegates, said the Centre had emerged as a regional platform for excellence in Islamic finance. He said focus areas of CEIF included development of Islamic finance professionals and new human resources talent pool through industry linkages and international collaborations.

Two of the closed-door meetings deserve special mention, though details discussed were not made public. In the first session players and regulators discussed details that could help in making capital market and mutual funds Shariah compliant. The issue of financial inclusion and outreach were the two important themes to be discussed at length. The second session was between Sharaih scholars and regulators for evolving regulatory frame work that can help in developing products to meet the needs of different income strata and those having different risk appetite.

Yet another initiative was presentation of research papers discussing contemporary issues. One of the sessions deserves a specific mention where lending to farmers was discussed. At present bulk of the loans are extended to farmers against passbook or the landownership document. This process mostly benefits the feudal lords. In this discussion the issue of warehouse receipt financing was also debated. However, it was evident that unless modern warehouses and collateral management companies are established warehouse receipt financing may not be possible. Authors of selected papers were awarded cash prizes.

The takeaways of the concluding remarks of Dr. Ishrat Husain were: 1) creation of Shariah Board at Ministry of Finance, 2) borrowing for infrastructure development projects through flotation of Rupee and Dollar denominated Sukuks, 3) focus on the development of Fintechs for extending outreach of banks and ensure financial inclusion and 4) development of alternative delivery channels.

Poverty and health always go side by side. It’s very obvious that the poor will always try to adapt the cheap means of to fulfill its needs. He will use those resources which are easily available to him and same is the case with Pakistan. China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) has perhaps become the most talked about event in Pakistan and has been deemed as an economic anthem of the country far it is a toll for boosting the economy keeping in lines the international consensus on Climate Change. CPEC appears to be an absolute development and Environment friendly package in energy sector and will be a boon for Pakistan’s crippling economy. It envisages various road, railway, energy, infrastructure and industrial projects.

Substantially, in order to meet the energy crises Pakistan has stated various energy projects and coal power plants are one of them. In Sindh the CPEC is starting additional energy projects compared to any other province of Pakistan. Coal power plants in the area of Thar are being constructed. Thar-I coal power plant with 6600 MW and Thar-II coal power plant (consists of two power plants each of 330MW) will be using the indigenously produced coal through local coal mines. According to an estimate these local coal mines will be providing 3.8 million tons of coal on yearly basis. Port Qasim coal power plant is another coal based power plant constructed in Sindh worth of $2billion.

Moreover in Sahiwal coal power project of 1320MW is to be built as well along with the project of a coal mine of $589 million. A 330 MW of coal plant will also be launched in Punjab Salt Range and in Baluchistan at Hub and Gwadar; coal power plants of 660 MW and 300MW will be constructed respectively, to meet the energy demands

However due to such a huge investment for the energy projects, a major concern is the possible impact on environment sustainability and climate change. It is being argued that it will introduce a new set of problems because the coal power plants are considered to be one of the major contributors to greenhouse gases, which cause global warming.

This is also being said that these projects ignore the aspect of an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).Although Pakistan is responsible for a mere 0.43% of global greenhouse gas emissions, but it is among the world’s 10-most vulnerable countries to climate change. Moreover it can cause significant damage to the eco tourism and glaciers, which are diminishing due to expanded infrastructure. The wild life of the region could also be affected with changing natural landscapes. These are some of the impacts which should not be taken lightly.

Poverty has direct relation with environmental degradation and climate change because people use the cheap resources. However CPEC is not just about the energy generation projects but the concerned authorities have also considered the best means to considerably reduce the environmental damage. It has been formally agreed that one should not completely take for granted the impact of carbon foot print on the echo system.

Unfortunately, coal use has attracted a lot of criticism due to its environmental impact. Analysis shows that Pakistan’s energy mix contain a minimum share of coal is and it will remain less despite the investment in new coal fired power plants. It is pertinent to note that the developed economies like USA, Germany, Poland, etc are still at the forefront in carbon foot print then Pakistan. Furthermore, for Pakistan, it is important to overcome the problem of energy crisis and invest in renewable energy.

Both China and Pakistan are well conscious of the fact that these harmful externalities which this lignite coal possesses should not be ignored and decided to offset the impact by focusing more on renewable energy projects. It is explicitly explained in the Long Term Plan (LTP) that renewable energy sector will be the major area of investment in future. The Federal Minister for Power Division, Sardar Awais Ahmed Khan Leghari has proposed to establish a renewable energy institute in the country which is a good step for controlling the carbon foot prints. It also promises to bridge the energy gap by constructing numerous hydro, solar, wind power and Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) projects to reduce the green house emission.

Augmenting the share of renewable energy in power projects would also address the gaping disparity between the Pakistan and global leaders in the realm. In order to sustain the energy need and keeping in mind the climate effects the CPEC energy projects not only engage in generating power from coal but focus on other renewable sources of energy such as hydroelectric power for which Pakistan has a huge potential. For this a hydro power plant Suki Kinari with total capacity 870MW worth US $1802 Milionn to be constructed in Mansehra district of KPK. On 10th of January, 2016 construction of another hydropower plant famously known as “Karot Hydropower Plant” was on track.

This US $1420 Million power plant will be finished by the year 2020 and will be able to produce 720 MW of power from river Jhelum. Only these hydropower projects altogether will produce 7190 MW of electricity.

Similarly the CPEC places solar and wind energyprojects on the forefront to avoid the green house emission effect as they not only produce cheap electricity but are also better for the environment and are more sustainable in the long run.In the idea is to come up with the best possible options to fulfill the requirement of energy. Quaid-e-Azam Solar Park in Bahawalpur (US $1302 Million) is a 1,000 MW. solar energy generating plant whose first phase was completed by the year 2015 and the second phase will be completed by the end of year 2016.The commercial operation date (COD) of 300 MW was attained in August 2016.

To further overcome the coal emissions wind power plant at Jhimpir is constructed. It is producing 50 MW of electricity by wind power and another plant of 100 MW is likely to produce electricity through wind power with a cost of US $250 million through the CPEC.

Moreover it is pertinent to mention here that pakistan has planned some LNG energy projects planned to be carried out as part of the CPEC project. Among the LNG projects under CPEC, a 711KM long gas pipe line isto be built which will provide 1 billion cubic feet of LNG per day. The total cost of this project will be $2.5 billion. Along with reducing the carbon emission this project will not only supply gas to Pakistan but China will also get benefit from this project for its trade activities.

This is a known fact that China has adapted strict measures and it has developed a network of 1500 air quality monitoring stations in over 900 cities to control air pollution. Likewise to further make CPEC an environment friendly Pakistan and China can jointly collaborate on green house trading mechanism, this will offset environmental cost of carbon emission in Pakistan. However, it has also been stated in the LTP of CPEC, that China will also help Pakistan excel in the production of renewable energy related technologies. One can hope that, under global scrutiny, and for all that it promises in Paris agreement Pakistan is firmly committed to the purposes and objectives of the Climate Convention thus Making CPEC and environment friendly project.

*Qura tul ain Hafeez has done M Phil in international relations from Quaid-I Azam University Islamabad. She is currently working as a Research Associate at Strategic Vision Institute Islamabad. She can be reached at Quraathashmi@gmail.com

By Manoj Joshi

Though he has often been made out to be a cartoonish figure, John Bolton who has been appointed National Security Adviser by US President Donald J Trump, is a dangerous and clever man. He will have an immediate impact on two key areas of US foreign policy—Iran and North Korea.

Bolton was the US ambassador to the United Nations under George W Bush and has been known to have hawkish positions on most areas of foreign policy—Iran, North Korea, the UN, European Union and international agreements. The title of his 2007 memoir “Surrender is not an Option” speaks for itself. He has an abrasive personality and is known to be a bureaucratic infighter and for that reason the US Senate did not confirm him in 2002, Bush kept him in the post through a loophole process called the recess appointment. This time around, he does not need Senate clearance, though he will supervise a national security team of several hundred.

Given his reputation, it is not surprising that there is worry in South Korea that he could be the bull in the china shop and destroy all possibilities of a negotiation settlement with Kim Jong Un over the North Korea nuclear programme. The situation is delicately poised right now with both sides agreeing that dialogue is a good idea. South Korea has enormous stakes in the process for obvious reasons. But Bolton’s record on North Korea suggests that the only way out is to use military force.

The second area where the Bolton effect could strike is in relation to the Iran nuclear deal. The deal comes up for Presidential certification on May 12 and by then, Bolton would have had a month in office. Expectations are that Trump will follow his instincts to terminate the deal and Bolton will work out his rationale. The result will be a return of heavy sanctions on Teheran and will put the US against China and Russia, as well as Europe.

So far, Trump has been willing to fix the deal, which, in his view, should not be confined only to nuclear issues. The deal should include Iranian action on the non-nuclear areas such as its missile programme and its activities in Syria and Lebanon. However, with Bolton there, the American policy could be one of outright scuttling of the deal.

Last week, a former chief of the Israeli Defence Forces, Shaul Mofaz told a conference that Bolton tried to convince him of the need for Israel to attack Iran. Mofaz, along with three other IDF chiefs, Benny Gantz, Dan Halutz and Modhe Ya’alon are against the cancelling of the deal. Mofaz served as chief till 2002 and was thereafter appointed Defence Minister by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. However, the current Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has for long advocated military action against Iran.

All this comes at a time when Trump has begun to move in his long-awaited trade sanctions against China. He has announced tariffs on $ 60 billion worth of Chinese goods, but this could be just the first part of his moves. A detailed list of goods will now be released, followed by a 30-day period for comments in which lobbyists for specific industries will have a field day. In the main, the tariffs are targeting those sectors that the Chinese are promoting for their Made in China 2025 policy, strategic areas which it wants to fill out in its bid to emerge as the leading nation of the world.

The US could also announce restrictions on Chinese investment in the US and visa restrictions for Chinese citizens, especially those who want to study in the fields of science and technology.

There is still time for the US and China to work out a deal on tariffs. Earlier this month, China’s top economic policy maker, Liu He, recently appointed Vice-President of the country, was in Washington and no doubt sought to engage the US in discussions to forestall a trade war. China has hinted at reciprocal tariffs that could hit US agri-exports which could hurt Trump’s political base.

With the US declaring that the policy of engagement with China will now be replaced by one of competition, and the Chinese saying they have entered a New Era under Xi Jinping, we can expect greater friction between the world’s two premier powers.

A dangerous side-show here could be a changed US policy towards Taiwan. Beijing has made it clear that it will view any separatism on the part of the island republic as tantamount to treason and Xi has virtually promised reunification, by force or otherwise in his term. On the other hand, Bolton and the incoming Secretary of State Mike Pompeo are said to be very supportive of Taiwan.

We stand, therefore at the cusp of three wars, one between the US and China on trade with the Taiwan issue that could well make it a shooting war, the possibilities of war with Iran and North Korea. Since World War II the US has not really won any war, barring the one against Grenada in 1983. But it remains the foremost military power in the world, capable of bringing down great, if not total destruction on its adversaries.

It is always easy to start a war, but very difficult to know how it will end. Take the US which began a war with Iraq in 1991, invaded it again in 2003. It cost the US a staggering $ 3 trillion plus and nearly 5,000 soldiers, it cost Iraq much, much more. It has seen devastation of their nation, the rise of the Islamic State and the collateral destruction of Syria as well. It has deepened the faultlines between the Shias and Sunnis into which the US now risks falling into.

This article originally appeared in Greater Kashmir

Consumers did not realize the value of their personal data, and policies are not keeping pace with the growth of data collection and sales.

By Susan Froetschel*

The scandal involving Facebook and datamining company Cambridge Analytica dramatically confirms the old adage of “no free lunch.” Facebook’s more than 2 billion users are waking up to the fact that the “free” online site, part of their daily routine, extracted a stiff price: valuable personal data. The only way to protect one’s data is vigilance by all, though that may well be the equivalent of closing the barn door after the proverbial horse escaped.

News reports that Cambridge Analytica swept up details on millions of Facebook users – then used details for targeted political advertising in many countries – jolted industry, regulators and users. Yet users consented to data exchanges, often impatiently, without reading pages of small print of terms-of-service agreements. Many companies profit handsomely from knowing the range and length of users’ phone calls, driving patterns, family history and genetics, purchase details through credit cards and store discount cards, insurance claims for health problems, and games that measure frustration levels or ability to follow rules.

Of course, gigantic Facebook is not alone. Big-data analysis is big business. Companies continue to discover new value in cross-industry exchanges, combining forces to monetize datasets to improve services, reduce fraud, attract new customers or meet regulatory requirements. Cambridge Analytica is not alone either. In China, the Shanghai Data Exchange, started in 2017, offers a platform for trading all types of consumer information gathered from telecommunications, credit cards and more with the aim of drawing technology firms to the city. The exchange anticipates accounting for one third of China’s data trading volume by 2020.  Global revenues for data analytics are expected to exceed $200 billion in 2020, according to International Data Corp., which points out the rush to share data could be prone to conflicts of interest.

Collecting data to assess target groups is not new. Decades ago, telemarketing firms relied on typists to go through phone books, cross-listing names and numbers with other public lists. Librarians understood the potential privacy pitfalls early on and endorsed policies to protect confidentiality – before computers became widespread, libraries stopped using cards listing individuals who had previously borrowed books. Likewise, the college application process has long been a data-mining exercise to determine which applicants are likely to enroll and graduate.

Patients, borrowers, students who fill out offline application forms are not exempt from becoming targets. Paper forms are quickly scanned into computer files. Large community events and fairs offer opportunities for data gathering. Hundreds of vendors attending large home shows hold contests to gather potential customer contacts, and job fairs collect resumes to study the evolving job market and reap new employer contacts.

Computers made data collection easy. Any type of data can be packaged and marketed. Cities already provide data on properties, taxes and public health as a public service, and the World Economic Forum suggests communities could do more to distribute data on assets from traffic to waste collection. Associations offer services and information on how to research and package data. To improve efficiency, utilities in India, Europe and the United States rely on smart meters to monitor and predict patterns of energy and water use. Committees and policies for monitoring data use and information governance so far are not keeping up with the growing numbers of organizations gathering and trading data.

Data products can be specific, offering details about individuals, or aggregated to relay broad trends.  Laws in the United States and Europe protect individual health, education or financial information, but do not ban aggregation as described in privacy policies, terms of agreement and license agreements. For example, the Common Application – an online form required for applying to many US colleges – details its policy: Third parties and contracted researchers may have access to application and related information which can then be packaged as “non-personal identifying demographic, historical, generic, analytical, statistical or aggregate data obtained from other sources, and/or data.”

Health is an especially sensitive area, and privacy laws, even the strict new data protections to be imposed by the European Union in May, include exceptions. The EU law requires that patient data “be collected for a specific explicit and legitimate purpose” but allows that same data to “be re-used for research” for the public-interest purpose of driving innovative treatments. The same law limits how long patient data can be stored, “except for archiving and scientific research purposes.” Explicit patient consent is not required as long as safeguards masking identity are in place. Of course, as the Cambridge Analytica case shows, data collected ostensibly for “academic” research can be deployed for other operations.

Financial firms collaborate on data collection to avoid risks. Insurers form special units for collecting drivers’ data. Digital strategies fuel growth, explains Boston Consulting Group. Companies combine online business processes with communications and services to gather data. App developers respond with entertaining quizzes, surveys and games designed to entice consumers to hand over more data. The harvest of Facebook profiles began with a small personality test, fewer than 300,000 users took part for a tiny sum, and in the process millions of friends got dragged into the net.

Less than 20 percent of third-party app developers for Facebook’s platform are based in the United States. Developers like Elitech in India provide custom-designed applications or games that assess target audiences and prioritize user engagement. Developers can use games to assess user performance and personality with small tasks from placing an order to solving problems. Facebook encourages developers around the world with Developer Circles, anticipating local app development to lead to more local users.

Asia leads the world with more than 30 percent of 20 million app developers while Europe and North America each have about 30 percent. Economic Times reports that India leads the world in Facebook users and has the second largest base of Facebook developers. Developers and social media firms worry about new regulations disrupting the growing industry. Apps and games available from Apple’s iTunes Store went from a few hundred in 2009 to more than 3 million in 2017, with downloads in the billions.

Apps take advantage of the universal desires to play, understand ourselves, or compare how we perform with others. Experts analyze user choices, associating interests as detected by searches and clicks with individual behavior, hunting for patterns and correlations. Some companies offer discounts to customers deemed as reliable or credit-worthy; other firms hunt for gullible, impulsive spenders.

Unorganized data may seem worthless, and Facebook and countless others readily opened the gates to app developers and advertisers with little attention to the ultimate goals behind data transfers. Soon after news emerged about Cambridge Analytica’s use of Facebook profiles, Mark Zuckerberg issued an apology, admitting that even social media executives had not realized the full potential of their platforms and how many insights might be gleaned. He admitted not imagining in launching Facebook in 2004 that the site could be accused of changing the course of an election. To Recode, he admitted to feeling “uncomfortable sitting here in California at an office, making content policy decisions for people around the world.” His strategy is for communities to decide their values and rules for Facebook.

Users have a choice on what to share and with whom. Like it or not, big-data analysis influences communities and workplaces, and users have a responsibility to read lengthy policies with care. A lesson emerging from the Cambridge Analytica and Facebook debacle is that those who refuse to surrender data cannot evade the consequences especially when so many other users do share. Millions of friends whose data was harvested may not have given specific consent, but in the end that did not matter.

*Susan Froetschel is editor of YaleGlobal Online and the author of five novels including Fear of Beauty and Allure of Deceit, both set in Afghanistan.

Donald Trump has undertaken a dramatic initiative to put Putin in his place before it’s too late. The tipping point was Russia’s alleged nerve agent poisoning of ex-Russian citizen Sergei Skripal in London.

In response Trump’s kicked out 60 Russian diplomats from the US and shut down that country’s consulate in Seattle.

There have been two divergent reactions to that. Some are pleased that Trump has finally put Putin in his place. But others are concerned that he has set the US on a course that risks nuclear conflict with Russia.

I think there are good reasons to question the genuineness of Trump’s motives.

Consider this:

First, Trump has long said he wants to get along with Putin, not alienate him. This goes way back to his campaign rhetoric. He recently reaffirmed that position.

Second, nobody, absolutely nobody, has produced any believable proof that Russia is to blame in the Skripal case. Maybe yes, maybe no. At this point nobody knows. The investigation has barely gotten underway. But yet there has been an irrational rush to judgment. Why the hurry?

Third, Trump’s departure from his well-established policy to get along with Putin follows on the tail of a very bad week he’s had. There’s the interminably long Mueller probe into Trump’s alleged collusion with Putin to beat Hillary Clinton in the presidential election. Then there were two prominent national TV interviews. They were with women alleging hushed-up sexual affairs with Trump from years back.

Trump may have felt that things were closing in on him. Those salacious interviews may have been the straw that broke the camel’s back. His attack on Putin came right on the heels of the latest compromising interview.

Think about it. Trump had a strong motivation to divert public attention away from his alleged misdeeds. His political opponents are using them to delegitimize his presidency, win control of the House of Representatives this year, and then impeach Trump.

But look what he’s done in response.

He has become a conspirator in the UK Prime Minister Theresa May’s illegal assault upon the Russian state. Here is a list of her and her country’s transgressions.

–The UK has violated the spirit of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. That has involved:

–Expelling Russian diplomats explicitly based on allegations for which there is yet no substantiation.

–Indicting in the media both Russia and its president for the attempted murder of Skripal before any reasonable investigation could have been concluded.

–Refusing to share with Russia information that Moscow could use to investigate any possible culpability in the incident by anyone either on Russian soil or under Russian control.

These are my observations as a citizen of Switzerland. I am not a politician, but an established businessman of Swiss and Persian heritage. I steadfastly try to uphold the tradition of my country for neutrality and impartiality. But I have some inescapable concerns that I must share with you.

I’m old enough to remember Bill Clinton’s Monica Lewinsky sex scandal. Clinton initiated military strikes against Iraq and Afghanistan at opportunistic times during the unfolding of the scandal. Polls show that a great many Americans believed the actions were timed to distract public attention from the public shaming of the president.

Unlike Clinton’s engineered distractions, Trump’s didn’t result in considerable loss of life. But Tump’s actions may turn out to be far worse for the whole world in the long run. His retaliation against Russia for yet unproven misdeeds amounts to no more than a provocation, plain and simple.

History tells us that world wars have been initiated not merely by dire circumstances, but by provocations. For World War I it was the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand in Sarajevo over a local struggle. That spun out of control to envelop great world powers in what came to be known as the “Great War.”

A provocation was also alleged in the start of World War II. Many implicate a Nazi false-flag attack on a German radio station in Gleiwitz. Nazi operatives dressed in Polish uniforms allegedly attacked the site in order to bolster Hitler’s rationale for invading Poland. World War II followed.

Now what are we to think of Theresa May’s provocative and unsupported allegations against Russia in the Skripal case? What is her game plan in precipitously accusing Russia in the absence of substantiating facts?

I’ve already posited my suspicion regarding Trump’s motives for joining in. What does he think he’ll accomplish by expelling 60 Russian diplomats and ordering the closure of Russia’s only West Coast consulate?

Clearly these provocations will lead to retaliation. There is a risk that things will spiral out of control. Is the UK Skripal Affair worth the risk of a direct nuclear confrontation between the US and Russia?

A likely place for this to play out is in Syria. Russia has valid national interests there. It is clear to most people that the US has valid interests in Germany, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, etc. But Russia’s interests in Syria are too often minimized or ignored by the world community.

Now we are faced with both Russian and American military forces operating in Syria concurrently. Sometimes they exist at cross-purposes.

Moscow has hinted strongly and openly that great strife could be sparked by covert US military actions. Washington has been warned not to endanger Russian lives or to damage Russian military assets. Putin has threatened serious consequences.

The serious consequence that concerns me most is possible nuclear retaliation in some form by Russia. Russia has all the means to respond if attacked. The question is how far can Putin be pushed before he pushes the button.

Ironically, such a response would be within the realm of international law since Russia has issued clear warnings. It has drawn a red line that can never be crossed. It is the harming of Russian lives by US actions.

Russian officials have suggested that there will be tit-for-tat retaliation for Western diplomatic expulsions and other unjustified actions against it.

I fear that may not send a clear enough message, especially to Mrs. May. After all, it is she who has been the primary instrument of attack.

An unmistakable move by Moscow would be to send the UK’s ambassador packing and order the closure of all UK diplomatic offices on Russian soil. That would constitute a message that would be hard to misunderstand.

Can “culture” enhance contemporary India’s military and economic profile in Southeast Asia?

Over the last couple of years – especially at the meeting with ASEAN leaders in New Delhi last January – the Modi government has highlighted the possible role of the Indian diaspora in building ties with Southeast Asian countries. The spread of Hindu and Buddhist culture from India and the Indian diaspora’s presence in the region can be traced back to cultural, political and commercial contacts that were made several centuries ago.

But contemporary reality must be kept in mind. China’s latest defence budget – $175 billion – reminds us that its growing military power rests on more than 30 years of economic progress. Unlike the 19th century European imperial powers, China’s claim to “great power” does not stem from the acquisition of colonies carved out through conquest. And unlike the 20th century US, China does not sustain its clout through military alliances worldwide.

In fact, China was already “East” long before India started acting “East” barely four years ago. Its version of “history”, geographical proximity to Southeast Asia – and most of all, its economic strength – underlie its territorial hawkishness.

Moreover, China’s political and economic influence in Southeast Asia does not hinge on the presence of the large Chinese diaspora – some 30 million – there. That is a lot more than the six million or so strong Indian diaspora which New Delhi hopes will help strengthen its “eastern act” with ASEAN and Southeast Asian countries.

True, the image of Cambodia’s world famous Angkor Wat, which started as a Hindu temple and eventually became Buddhist, appears on Cambodia’s national flag. The Garuda is Thailand’s national emblem and part of the state insignia of Indonesia. But it is unlikely that references to centuries-old cultural exports and the Indian diaspora will promote India’s political and economic interests in Asia.

Culture is never static

India’s own cultural diversity – like that of Southeast Asia – stems from centuries of foreign conquest, political changes, cultural influences, migration and international trade. Several cultural and religious influences, including those of China, the US, Islam and Christianity have shaped the politics and societies of Southeast Asia.

In fact, Islam is the most prevalent religion in Southeast Asia. In Malaysia, which has the largest population of Indian origin, Islam is the state religion. Hindus make up just over 6% of its population, Muslims nearly 62%. Secular Indonesia, is home to the world’s largest Buddhist temple at Borobudur and also to the world’s largest Muslim population. More than 87% of its population is Muslim, while Hindus make up 1.7%.

Ninety percent of Philippines’ population identifies as Catholic. Especially after the sixteenth century, the diverse cultural influences in the Philippines were derived particularly from periods of the Spanish and American rule. Even prior to that, trade with India and China did not result in a major Chinese or Indian cultural influence in this archipelago.

Meanwhile, in Singapore – whose air force is the only military to have bilateral agreements with India for all its service arms – ethnic Chinese comprise about 75% of the population and Indians 9%. But, for Singapore and other Southeast Asian countries, the dispute over the South China Sea takes the sheen off an economically strong but expansionist China.

Such an array of facts should impress on New Delhi that ethnicity, religion and culture do not determine political and economic choices made by countries.

The trade story

China accounts for 39% of Cambodia’s imports, India for 0.77%. The total trade between India and Cambodia in 2015 stood at $187.36 million in 2015 while that between Cambodia and China was $4.8 billion in 2016.

An analogous picture emerges from Thailand. Currently, Japan is the largest foreign investor in Thailand. Twelve percent of Thailand’s exports go to the US, 11% to China and 2.4% to India. Considering imports, 22% of Thai imports come from China and only 1.4% from India.

In today’s globalised world, most people emigrate for economic reasons. As with, say, Americans of Indian origin, citizens of Southeast Asian countries who are of Indian origin will participate in India’s economic efforts only if they perceive India offering them favourable conditions for investing.

With China’s economic and military power looming large over Southeast Asia, India has often reiterated its support for maritime freedom and security in Asia’s international waters. But by the time India first joined the US in October 2014 in expressing concern about maritime safety in the South China Sea, China had already deployed missiles, fighters and surveillance equipment on the reefs in its possession.

India is the only Asian country which has the size, demographic, economic and military potential to counter China. But if India’s economic and strategic relations with Southeast Asia are being strengthened by its $2-trillion-plus economy, China’s ties with the region are being driven by its $12-trillion-plus economy.

This puts a question mark over India’s possible contribution to maintaining security in Southeast Asia. China’s strong economy has given an impetus to its burgeoning arms industry and trade. In contrast, India imports nearly 70% of its weapons. The awkward fact is that India’s strengthening of economic and military ties with ASEAN countries is not synonymous with competing on a level playing field with China.

Economic progress and perhaps some cultural exports reflecting that progress, rather than extolling the virtues or influence of age-old Hindu and Buddhist cultures, will polish India’s image as a country capable of making a major contribution to the stability and security of Southeast Asia.

This article appeared at

Can “culture” enhance contemporary India’s military and economic profile in Southeast Asia?

Over the last couple of years – especially at the meeting with ASEAN leaders in New Delhi last January – the Modi government has highlighted the possible role of the Indian diaspora in building ties with Southeast Asian countries. The spread of Hindu and Buddhist culture from India and the Indian diaspora’s presence in the region can be traced back to cultural, political and commercial contacts that were made several centuries ago.

But contemporary reality must be kept in mind. China’s latest defence budget – $175 billion – reminds us that its growing military power rests on more than 30 years of economic progress. Unlike the 19th century European imperial powers, China’s claim to “great power” does not stem from the acquisition of colonies carved out through conquest. And unlike the 20th century US, China does not sustain its clout through military alliances worldwide.

In fact, China was already “East” long before India started acting “East” barely four years ago. Its version of “history”, geographical proximity to Southeast Asia – and most of all, its economic strength – underlie its territorial hawkishness.

Moreover, China’s political and economic influence in Southeast Asia does not hinge on the presence of the large Chinese diaspora – some 30 million – there. That is a lot more than the six million or so strong Indian diaspora which New Delhi hopes will help strengthen its “eastern act” with ASEAN and Southeast Asian countries.

True, the image of Cambodia’s world famous Angkor Wat, which started as a Hindu temple and eventually became Buddhist, appears on Cambodia’s national flag. The Garuda is Thailand’s national emblem and part of the state insignia of Indonesia. But it is unlikely that references to centuries-old cultural exports and the Indian diaspora will promote India’s political and economic interests in Asia.

Culture is never static

India’s own cultural diversity – like that of Southeast Asia – stems from centuries of foreign conquest, political changes, cultural influences, migration and international trade. Several cultural and religious influences, including those of China, the US, Islam and Christianity have shaped the politics and societies of Southeast Asia.

In fact, Islam is the most prevalent religion in Southeast Asia. In Malaysia, which has the largest population of Indian origin, Islam is the state religion. Hindus make up just over 6% of its population, Muslims nearly 62%. Secular Indonesia, is home to the world’s largest Buddhist temple at Borobudur and also to the world’s largest Muslim population. More than 87% of its population is Muslim, while Hindus make up 1.7%.

Ninety percent of Philippines’ population identifies as Catholic. Especially after the sixteenth century, the diverse cultural influences in the Philippines were derived particularly from periods of the Spanish and American rule. Even prior to that, trade with India and China did not result in a major Chinese or Indian cultural influence in this archipelago.

Meanwhile, in Singapore – whose air force is the only military to have bilateral agreements with India for all its service arms – ethnic Chinese comprise about 75% of the population and Indians 9%. But, for Singapore and other Southeast Asian countries, the dispute over the South China Sea takes the sheen off an economically strong but expansionist China.

Such an array of facts should impress on New Delhi that ethnicity, religion and culture do not determine political and economic choices made by countries.

The trade story

China accounts for 39% of Cambodia’s imports, India for 0.77%. The total trade between India and Cambodia in 2015 stood at $187.36 million in 2015 while that between Cambodia and China was $4.8 billion in 2016.

An analogous picture emerges from Thailand. Currently, Japan is the largest foreign investor in Thailand. Twelve percent of Thailand’s exports go to the US, 11% to China and 2.4% to India. Considering imports, 22% of Thai imports come from China and only 1.4% from India.

In today’s globalised world, most people emigrate for economic reasons. As with, say, Americans of Indian origin, citizens of Southeast Asian countries who are of Indian origin will participate in India’s economic efforts only if they perceive India offering them favourable conditions for investing.

With China’s economic and military power looming large over Southeast Asia, India has often reiterated its support for maritime freedom and security in Asia’s international waters. But by the time India first joined the US in October 2014 in expressing concern about maritime safety in the South China Sea, China had already deployed missiles, fighters and surveillance equipment on the reefs in its possession.

India is the only Asian country which has the size, demographic, economic and military potential to counter China. But if India’s economic and strategic relations with Southeast Asia are being strengthened by its $2-trillion-plus economy, China’s ties with the region are being driven by its $12-trillion-plus economy.

This puts a question mark over India’s possible contribution to maintaining security in Southeast Asia. China’s strong economy has given an impetus to its burgeoning arms industry and trade. In contrast, India imports nearly 70% of its weapons. The awkward fact is that India’s strengthening of economic and military ties with ASEAN countries is not synonymous with competing on a level playing field with China.

Economic progress and perhaps some cultural exports reflecting that progress, rather than extolling the virtues or influence of age-old Hindu and Buddhist cultures, will polish India’s image as a country capable of making a major contribution to the stability and security of Southeast Asia.

This article was published by The Wire.

By Jonathan Power*

This present pope – Francis – is probably the most powerful man in the world, in the round.

Stalin once asked when confronted with the argument about the Pope’s reach and influence, replied, “How many divisions has the pope got?” He missed the point. The pope does not work these days in the world of hard power. He is a peddler of soft power.

Francis has much more power, maybe because of the strength of his convictions, than any of his predecessors, with the exception of the Polish pope, John Paul II, who played a front-line role in triggering the events that brought down communism.

John Paul II set his sights high. How could this youngish pope have such an impact? It was drive, personality and an intuitive knowledge about how power worked. He was also enormously charismatic and could summon up a crowd of half a million people with the click of his fingers – or so it sometimes seemed.

Francis uses his power and crowd-pulling charisma for a different cause – to help the poor, the dispossessed and the suffering. Traditionally, popes have stressed the value of the Church’s edicts on divorce, birth control and the confession of sins.

At one time, not very long ago, it concentrated on propagating belief in far-out concepts like infallibility, angels, limbo and purgatory. Maybe Francis believes some of this but it isn’t what he likes to talk about, as his predecessors did.

When he was the new Archbishop of Buenos Aires he still rejected liberation theology with its strong socialist content that embraces the so-called “preferential option for the poor”. He came to change his mind. The poor and this philosophy are now the center-pieces of his work.

But did that make him a through and through good man? I don’t think so.

I came to this conclusion after a long and thorough study of his earlier life as the superior of the Argentinian Jesuits, a bishop and finally a cardinal. In that period he shunned for most of the time being outspoken about the appalling abuses of the military government, despite many Catholics being tortured or having their small children confiscated.

What he did do was to help on the quiet – sheltering people on the run and intervening with the authorities about particular prisoners. In this sense he was the opposite of his counterpart in Brazil, which was also under the thumb of a military regime.

Cardinal Paulo Arns took the government head on publically and as a result was very much a major contributing influence in ending the regime and turning Brazil towards democracy.

My long article on Francis was published two years ago by the World Policy Journal. The editor of this influential foreign policy magazine aptly headlined my article, “When the Pope turned his back”.

The full story has not been told elsewhere. In a new book, “Absolute Power”, published this month, the space given to it is fairly brief. The author, Paul Collins, does the same as the three major authors who published before him- playing down this aspect of Francis’s life.

In other ways it is an outstanding book, going right back to the popes of the Enlightenment and giving living portraits of the popes of the last century. To understand how the church has changed and evolved over the last 300 years and produced a pope like Francis this book is extremely useful.

There are some important things the present pope misses out on in his many contributions to foreign affairs, and the book gives the reader the depth that one needs to have in order to understand this. For example, take the life of Benedict XV who was pope during the First World War.

Benedict was a near pacifist, which surely Jesus Christ was. Benedict was probably the only pope who never mentioned the value of the just-war theory of Saints Augustine and Thomas, which Catholic politicians like to quote when they are involved in deploying almighty force. “Benedict opposed war in any form and rejected the theory of just war as historically outmoded”.

If only modern day popes could see war like this, given their immense charisma, they might well have had a real influence on stalling the wars in Vietnam, Central America, Afghanistan and Iraq.

Today Francis often speaks about contemporary foreign affairs. But as he shouts from the rooftops about aiding the poor so must he more loudly lead Catholics against war. He did take on President Donald Trump during the election for unchristian behavior, but obviously his attacks were not often enough or deep enough to persuade many Catholics not to vote for him.

If he could be more outspoken, not less, then, despite the inadequacies in part of his earlier life, he could become to be seen, perhaps, as one of the greatest of all popes. [IDN-InDepthNews – 27 March 2018]

*Note: For 17 years Jonathan Power was a foreign affairs columnist and commentator for the International Herald Tribune – and a member of the Independent Commission on Disarmament, chaired by the prime minister of Sweden, Olof Palme.

By Ryan McMaken*

In Tuesday’s New York Times, former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens calls for a repeal of the Second Amendment, calling it a “relic of the 18th century.”

In response, many commentators have focused on what would be involved in repealing the amendment, noting that the formal amendment process is very costly and difficult. Amending the Constitution requires securing two-thirds majorities in both the House and the Senate — and then three-fourths of the states would have to ratify the amendment.

We Don’t Amend the Constitution the Old-Fashioned Way Anymore

It’s true that amending the constitution the old-fashioned way is not easy.

Historically, though, many reformers and activists thought it worth the effort. For example, reformers in the early 20th century advocated for, and passed, many new amendments that drastically changed the nature of the federal government. New amendments involving the income tax, the selection of US senators, and alcohol prohibition were all passed. Other major amendments came close to passing, such as one outlawing child labor, which would have expanded federal oversight of household chores for children.

But, in practice, there is another way to amend the Constitution, and this has become increasingly seen as the only way to modify the Constitution in recent decades. This other method is used almost annually through landmark Supreme Court decisions that create new “rights” or re-interpret the Constitution, or apply the provisions in the Constitution in new ways. The practical effect of these legal changes has been to amend the Constitution. And, this can be done without having to go through all the trouble of having to convince a sizable portion of the population to vote for the change.

We can find many examples of this if we look.

On the matter of abortion, for example, the Court in 1973 simply invented a new federal “right” to an abortion, and one that could be banned or regulated by federal law. Prior to this decision, it was almost universally accepted — among both pro- and anti-abortion observers — that abortion was a matter for state and local governments. The Supreme Court, without a formal amendment, nevertheless effectively amended the Constitution unilaterally.

Another example can be found during the New Deal. For years, the federal courts had opposed the sorts of federal regulatory schemes that Franklin Roosevelt was attempting to pass as part of his New Deal. Faced with court intransigence, Roosevelt threatened to “pack the court” and to heap political pressure on the Court. Nearly overnight, the Court began to approve New Deal legislation that it had previously opposed. Now, new federal regulations that had previously been deemed unconstitutional were now all constitutional. No constitutional amendment was necessary.

Indeed, even on the matter of gun control, courts have recently re-interpreted the Constitution in brand new ways.

In the 2008 case of District of Columbia vs. Heller, the Court expanded the Second Amendment to apply to state and local governments as well. Previous to this, state and local governments were far more unlimited in how they regulated guns.

Prior to the case, it was not quite clear, legally speaking, if the Amendment was subject to “incorporation” and thus applied to all levels of government. 

The Heller decision, which Stevens dissented on, expanded state and local restrictions on guns.

Historical experience backs this up since we find that state and local controls on gun ownership were common in the 19th century, and federal courts were not in the habit of striking them down. After all, municipal-level gun control measures could be found in many parts of the United States, including the so-called “Wild West.” Another example is the 1876 constitution of the State of Colorado which explicitly bans concealed weapons.

With Heller, however, the Second Amendment was expanded — and this was a de facto amendment to the US Constitution as well.

When these changes take place, they happen without asking the voters to approve the changes or debate the issues. All that is needed is for five judges in Washington, DC, to agree.

Although we often hear from some conservatives that the United States is becoming more democratic, the truth is that the old highly democratic means of amending the Constitution is now all but shunned. The modern habit is to defer to the “experts” — federal judges.

This way of thinking is alive and well today. There was once broad agreement, for example, that prohibiting broad classes of substances required a change to the Constitution. This is why the prohibition of alcohol required a constitutional amendment 90 years ago.

By the 1970s, though, passing constitutional amendments was out of style. Nowadays, when it comes to banning a variety of drugs other than alcohol, all that is necessary is to pass new federal statutes. The federal courts might strike those new laws down, or they might not. If the courts agree with new power grabs by Congress or the President, then the new change becomes constitutional. Fortunately for Congress and the President, the courts are very often inclined to agree.

From a political perspective, it’s just a lot easier to pass new federal laws and see what you can get away with.

This is why it’s very unlikely there’s going to be any formal repeal of the Second Amendment. Passing such an amendment would require a lot of time and effort from supporters — time and effort that could be better spent on getting a US president elected who will appoint judges who will act as if the Second Amendment had been repealed.

This is the way of amending the Constitution in modern America. While this has always been true to a significant extent, it is now all the more true that the federal courts are a political playground where judges make rulings that reflect their political ideologies.

John Paul Stevens knows all this, of course, and it’s extremely unlikely he thinks the Second Amendment will be repealed any time soon. He does know, however, that those who agree with him can affect what judges get appointed and how those judges rule. And that is how the Second Amendment will really be repealed.

About the author:
*Ryan McMaken (@ryanmcmaken) is the editor of Mises Wire and The Austrian. Send him your article submissions, but read article guidelines first. Ryan has degrees in economics and political science from the University of Colorado, and was the economist for the Colorado Division of Housing from 2009 to 2014. He is the author of Commie Cowboys: The Bourgeoisie and the Nation-State in the Western Genre.

Source:
This article was published by the MISES Institute