Month: April 2020

With Europe in the grips of the coronavirus epidemic, the Hungarian parliament approved laws giving Prime Minister Viktor Orbán new powers to fight the virus and rule by decree without a set time limit.

The move drew strong criticism from civil rights groups and international institutions, which warned that it gave the Hungarian leader unprecedented scope to pursue a crackdown on critics and dismantle democratic checks and balances. Members of the European Parliament voiced fears that the bill spells the end of Hungarian democracy and called for a European response. Former Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker urged EU leaders in POLITICO’s Brussels Playbook not to be “wishy-washy” but to call out Hungary’s actions in “plain language.”

POLITICO asked: What, concretely, should Europe do?

* * *

Set up a permanent monitor

Dacian Cioloș is president of the Renew Europe group in the European Parliament. 

The Hungarian government has exploited the coronavirus crisis to escalate the erosion of fundamental rights and democratic safeguards. This is unacceptable.

More than ever, the situation calls for strong and bold opposition, and I fully support the strong leadership that Hungary’s Momentum Party is providing in these testing times for democracy.

Europe, too, needs to do whatever it takes to restore democracy in Hungary. Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has crossed a line and needs to feel the consequences.

In the European Council, leaders need to hold a serious debate on Article 7. They should also commit to ensuring that any money allocated to Hungary as part of the next long-term EU budget (MFF) is conditional on Budapest’s adherence to the rule of law.

More immediately, the European Commission should propose an appropriate mechanism to make sure that, until democracy is restored in Hungary, all EU funds destined to benefit Hungarian citizens are managed directly by EU institutions. It should also set up a specific task force to assess and monitor the democratic situation in Hungary on a permanent basis.

All the pro-European political forces in the European Parliament, including the European People’s Party, also have to be clear and bold in condemning the Hungarian government’s actions.

Hungary is at the heart of the European project; its citizens share our European values and deserve the same rights and protections. The rule of law cannot be optional.

* * *

Keep a close eye on law’s application

Didier Reynders is European commissioner for justice.

The European Commission fully supports member countries in their fight against the COVID-19 crisis. Of course, emergency measures must be in full respect of our common values of democracy, the rule of law and respect for fundamental rights. They must be necessary, strictly proportionate and limited in time. The Commission will continue to monitor developments in all EU countries.

In this context, the situation in Hungary raises particular concerns. We will closely monitor the application of its emergency measures, including the application of the new criminal offense of spreading “fake news” during the “state of danger.”

In these challenging times, legal certainty and freedom of expression must be guaranteed. It is more important than ever that journalists can do their job freely.

The Commission will take action as necessary, as we have already done in the past.

* * *

Take care of the real emergency

Zoltán Kovács is Hungary’s secretary of state for international communication and relations.

It’s truly astonishing that now, in the midst of a deadly pandemic, anyone would have the time to debate another country’s approach to fighting this outbreak. These questions seem, as Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has said, “a costly luxury these days.”

But if we’re going to have this discussion, then it should begin with facts. Much of what’s been said is not accurate.

Many European countries now have a state of emergency, or emergency legislation, to respond to the coronavirus outbreak. In Hungary, our constitution, the Fundamental Law, empowers the government to take emergency measures and also clearly states that when the danger ends, the state of emergency and its decrees must end.

The law does not dissolve parliament. It empowers parliament, alongside the Constitutional Court, with oversight of government actions throughout the state of emergency.

The law clearly limits the government’s ability to “rule by decree.” It serves exclusively to prevent, treat, eradicate and remedy the harmful effects of the pandemic. The government may not impose laws by decree unrelated to that purpose.

New sanctions are focused specifically on spreading false information that endangers efforts to fight the virus and are worded narrowly so as to prevent them being used as a tool for political censorship.

What should the EU do about Hungary’s new law? Nothing. The EU should focus its energies on finding ways to help member countries fight the virus.

* * *

Shut off the funding tap

Pernille Weiss is a member of the European Parliament with the European People’s Party. 

The idea that the EU should create a mechanism to penalize countries that violate democratic standards and the rule of law is not new. But Hungary’s decision to adopt authoritarian measures in response to the coronavirus pandemic makes it essential — and urgent.

The EU’s next seven-year budget (MFF) should allow for a qualified majority of EU countries to impose quick and targeted sanctions against a member country that does not comply with the “Copenhagen Criteria” and the fundamental principles protected by the EU Treaty. The most swift and effective method would be to first withhold financial payments to the country in question, followed by financial “democracy penalties.”

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen should present a revised MFF proposal that takes these concerns into account. The EU’s national leaders should also actively work on the idea during European Council summits. Thirteen of them signed a declaration of concern about democracy and crisis interventions in the EU in the light of the coronavirus outbreak. Now is the time to put words into practice.

* * *

Boost funding to civil society

Márta Pardavi is co-chair of the Hungarian Helsinki Committee.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has thrown off the shackles of real checks and balances. Hungarians now face a double threat: a pandemic, and an increasingly authoritarian government.

The EU urgently needs to wake up and take action if it wants to prevent the virus of authoritarianism from infecting other countries.

The European Commission has to lead the way and send strong, unambiguous signals whenever EU values and law are under threat. It should launch values-based infringement actions and vigorously pursue them at the Court of Justice of the European Union, and it should prioritize Hungary in its monitoring of the use of emergency powers during the coronavirus crisis.

The EU should not fund the wrecking ball that a member country takes to its rule of law. The next EU long-term budget should include strong rule-of-law criteria. The Council and Parliament should adopt the regulation that makes funds conditional on respect for the rule of law, sanctioning serial offenders.

The next long-term budget should also include significant investment in critical infrastructure for democracy, the rule of law and human rights, as well as more funding for civil society and independent media organizations that promote EU values and hold governments accountable.

The EU’s national governments must prove they have a backbone and move forward in the Article 7 process to give specific recommendations on what Budapest has to do to meet EU democratic standards — including, most urgently, a clear sunset clause in Hungary’s emergency law.

And finally, it’s time for the European People’s Party to see Orbán’s Fidesz for what it is: a party with unlimited appetite for power and none for debate. It can no longer put off the decision on whether it really wants Fidesz as a member of its political family.

* * *

Help Hungary’s pro-Europeans

Gergely Karácsony is mayor of Budapest.

The coronavirus pandemic has made it more clear than ever that we can only fight threats — to our health, societies and democracies — at a European level.

As the EU allocates support for fighting the pandemic and considers its next seven-year budget, it needs to ensure that it is working with genuine partners. If a government considers the EU an enemy, as Viktor Orbán does, EU institutions should forge relationships with municipalities and local governments as well as NGOs, trade unions, academic institutions, small and medium enterprises and citizens’ movements.

To do so, the EU should redesign financial support schemes in a way that allows for more European funds — including regional development and social funds — to be channeled to local partners and it should provide those actors more authority over their use.

There are a number of current initiatives — the European Urban Initiative, the Connecting Europe Facility and the Horizon Europe program, for example — that would allow the EU to effectively support cities or local initiatives and ensure that funds are used to benefit citizens.

Even as Hungary flouts the bloc’s democratic rules, its cities and local entities remain committed to building a stronger, more just and sustainable Europe. We need Brussels’ support.

* * *

Tackle double standards

Gerolf Annemans is a member of the European Parliament with the Identity and Democracy Group.

The EU shouldn’t be surprised that Hungary became the first country to rebel against the EU, after Brussels started to strip away freedoms, specifically when it came to border control and migration. After all, Hungary, with its proud sense of national identity, was one of the first to rebel against the Soviet Union in 1956.

The EU, in advocating for its divisive idea of an “ever closer” EU super-state, has systematically portrayed Hungary’s political leadership as villains undermining democracy.

This is unfortunate, particularly in light of the impressive popular approval the Hungarian government enjoys. It is also evidence of the EU’s double standards.

In Belgium, a minority government seized power on the back of the coronavirus crisis despite not having a majority of parliamentary seats. The Belgian parliament granted this “corona government” extraordinary powers, resulting in reduced parliamentary competence. And yet not a single EU leader or institution criticized this move.

By attacking Hungary, the EU is carrying on with its “business as usual” even in the midst of a serious public health crisis. Instead of “doing something about Hungary,” we should focus instead on how to stop a rapidly derailing EU.

* * *

Stand up to the bully

John Dalhuisen is a senior fellow at the European Stability Initiative.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán used alarm over the coronavirus to give himself the power to rule by decree for as long as he thinks necessary and to jail people spreading “distorted facts.” The move was true to form for this master manipulator of crises. So was the response.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen declared “any emergency measures … must not last indefinitely,” but she could not bring herself to name Hungary. Nor could the 13 EU governments who expressed their “deep concern about the risk of violations of the principles of rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights arising from the adoption of certain emergency measures.”

Sensing room for another unopposed victory, Orbán went ahead and signed up to the statement too.

Those concerned about unchecked autocratic rule in an EU member country shouldn’t let themselves be mocked. Three immediate steps would signal they’re serious about condemning Hungary.

The 13 EU governments should reissue their statement, this time explicitly denouncing Hungary’s open-ended emergency powers. Those same states should challenge Hungary in the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. And the European People’s Party should finally expel Orbán’s Fidesz party from its political group.

Orbán’s authority — and the force of his example — has grown because no one has stood up to him. It will wane when his own supporters, and Hungarian voters, realize that he is putting their place at the European table at risk. Now is the time to make this clear.

For the latest information and analysis on COVID-19 and its global implications sign up for POLITICO’s Daily Coronavirus Update or update your preferences.

OTTAWA — The federal government says nearly 5.4 million Canadians are now receiving emergency aid to replace incomes lost due to COVID-19.

The figures this morning show 5.38 million applications have been processed since March 15, a figure that includes people who were previously on employment insurance before being moved over to the Canada Emergency Response Benefit.

During the first week it was available, there were just under 3.5 million claims for the $2,000-a-month benefit, including nearly 172,000 over the past two days.

Watch: Trudeau says government support to remain throughout COVID-19 fight

 

In all, the government has received 5.97 million claims for financial help since the crisis began about one month ago.

More help is to arrive next week in the form of a new loan program to help eligible small businesses cover costs.

And more federal aid from a 75-per-cent wage subsidy program, approved by Parliament on Saturday, will be available by early May.

Conservative finance critic Pierre Poilievre is calling on the government to rejig the credit program that runs through banks and credit unions to increase the value of loans and allow small businesses to use it to pay wages.

He says that would help companies pay workers now instead of waiting a few weeks for the wage-subsidy program to pay out.

When the government is able to pay the subsidy to eligible businesses, Poilievre is proposing that companies take the first tranche to pay off the increased loans.

RELATED

• Parliament Approves $73-Billion Wage Subsidy Bill After Day-Long Debate

• Watch Trudeau’s Full Address To A Canada ‘In Mourning’ Over COVID-19

• Alberta To Send Extra COVID Medical Equipment To Ontario, Quebec And B.C.

The Opposition Conservatives are also calling on the Trudeau Liberals to come up with a plan specifically to help the nation’s restaurant, hospitality and tourism sectors.

Many of those businesses were either among the first to close due to public health concerns related to COVID-19, or have seen dramatic declines as consumer spending drops.

A handful of Conservative critics say in a statement this morning that the government must give these businesses the tools to open their doors again, and to retain workers through the pandemic, especially in areas with historically high unemployment.

Among the ideas being proposed are temporarily allowing owner-operators to qualify for the federal wage-subsidy program as well as refunding a year’s worth of GST remittances to small businesses.

A report last week by the parliamentary budget officer estimated that refunding federal sales tax to small businesses would cost Ottawa’s coffers about $12.9 billion

This report by The Canadian Press was first published April 13, 2020.

OTTAWA — Most Canadians want to see significant progress in the fight against COVID-19 before they would feel comfortable with people being allowed to return to work, a new poll suggests.

The poll says 29 per cent of Canadians believe restrictions on workplace and leisure activities should only be lifted once the country is free of any new cases for at least two weeks.

One-quarter of respondents said they would want to see only sporadic cases being discovered before such restrictions are lifted, and assurance there is no pressure on the health system.

Just over 20 per cent think Canadians should continue to physically isolate and stay away from work until there is a vaccine to protect against the virus.

The poll, conducted by Leger and the Association for Canadian Studies between April 9 and 12, surveyed 1,508 adult Canadians and 1,012 adult Americans randomly recruited from its online panel. The internet-based survey cannot be assigned a margin of error because online polls are not considered random samples.

“We wanted to look at that aspect because we’re now in that phase where people are starting to reconsider when are we going back to normal,” said Christian Bourque, executive vice-president of Leger. “They seem to be favouring the mid- to long-term more than the short-term.” 

RELATED

• Almost Half Of Canada’s COVID-19 Deaths Tied To Long-Term Care Homes: Tam
• Ford Will Extend State Of Emergency For 28 Days
• What Will Life Look Like In Canada In 3 Months? Experts Weigh In

Recently released federal projections show that it could be mid-summer, or even late summer, before the first wave of Canada’s epidemic is over, and that is the best-case scenario.

As for a vaccine, that is likely still many months away.

Canadians seem highly dedicated to obeying the rules set out by public health, as 98 per cent of the poll respondents said they abide by social distancing.

Until current restrictions are lifted, 40 per cent say they would report someone whose is not obeying public health rules, with the largest number of would-be snitches in the Atlantic provinces, at 50 per cent, and Quebec, at 48 per cent.

“It’s as if Canadians are saying, not that we’re comfortable … but that we feel it’s the right thing for now and maybe a few weeks more,” Bourque said.

Those results show a serious departure from Canada’s neighbours to the south, where 46 per cent say they would not report rule-breakers to the authorities.

The United States has become the new worldwide epicentre of the COVID-19 outbreak, and has now reported more deaths than any other country. But attitudes there about physical distancing and public health measures appear more lax than in Canada, according to the poll results.

Watch: Here are some mental health tips to get you through this pandemic. Story continues below.

 

Pollsters offered a list of public health measures, including staying two metres away from others, and only going out for necessities.

They found the rate of non-compliance with at least one of those measures in the U.S. was 46 per cent, compared to 26 per cent in Canada.

“It probably explains in part why we’re doing so much better than our southern neighbour,” Bourque said.

Sixty-five per cent of Canadians polled were fearful about the impact our southern neighbours could have on the pandemic here.

Americans are decidedly less worried about how the Canadian epidemic is playing out, with only 19 per cent concerned that it will impact their country.

People in the U.S. also appear far less satisfied with measures put in place by U.S. President Donald Trump, with only 44 per cent in support. In Canada, the federal government is enjoying 76 per cent support for its anti-virus measures.

Liberals gaining traction

Bourque said Canadians’ trust in institutions appears to be helping in Canada.

On Monday, Canada’s chief public health officer Dr. Theresa Tam said Canada’s epidemic curve is starting to show positive signs, as the growth of cases begins to slow down.

It is also helping Canada’s Liberal party, which is enjoying growing support for its response to the pandemic, he said.

The pollsters asked who respondents would vote for if an election was held today, compared to responses from January 22, before the COVID-19 crisis hit Canada.

Opposition parties have seen a slight decline in support among decided voters, whereas Liberal support has climbed to 39 per cent from 31 per cent earlier this year.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published on April 14, 2020.

OTTAWA — Parliament has approved a massive $73-billion wage subsidy program aimed at helping businesses and workers survive the economic ravages of the COVID-19 pandemic.

A bill to implement what Prime Minister Justin Trudeau called the most significant economic program since the Second World War was passed Saturday by the House of Commons “on division” after some six hours of speeches and debate.

On division means there was some opposition among the handful of MPs in the chamber but there was no recorded vote. It was not immediately clear who objected.

But sources in other parties, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak about confidential, behind-the-scenes negotiations, suggested the Conservatives insisted on the final vote being on division as part of an agreement to let the bill sail through the Commons in a matter of hours.

Click Here: Geelong Cats Guernsey

In the Senate later, it was Conservative Senate leader Don Plett who called for the bill to be passed by that chamber “on division” as well, after which it received royal assent late Saturday.

Plett accused the government of being “asleep at the wheel” and “doing too little, too late” throughout the crisis and asserted that, “by consistently fumbling its management of the health crisis, this government has led the country straight into an economic crisis.”

Plett also took a sharp jab at Trudeau, who went into self-isolation at his home, Rideau Cottage, after his wife fell ill with COVID-19.

Watch: Canada emergency response benefit still unclear for students, gig workers. Story continues below video.

“Essential workers get up every day and leave the safety of their home to serve their country. Perhaps the prime minister should have done the same and gone into the office to pick up the phone and properly consult with Canadians, instead of choosing to stay at his cottage long after his 14-day isolation had ended,” Plett told a handful of senators in the upper house.

Despite the Conservatives’ apparent lingering misgivings about the content of the bill, they agreed to allow it to pass quickly and dropped their previous attempt to tie the bill to the longer-term question of how Parliament should function in the midst of the crisis.

At a morning news conference just hours before the Commons met for a rare emergency sitting on the Easter long weekend, Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer said his party agreed to continue discussions later on the future of Parliament.

The bill authorizes the federal government to pay companies 75 per cent of the first $58,700 earned by each employee, up to $847 per week for up to 12 weeks. The subsidy is retroactive to March 15 and will be available to companies that lost 15 per cent of their revenue in March or 30 per cent in April or May.

Finance Minister Bill Morneau said the money will begin to flow within two to five weeks, with the government working to get it started in the shortest possible time.

Scheer said Conservatives won some improvements to the bill over the past week of negotiations and argued that demonstrates how important it is to have the Commons sitting regularly so that the government can be held to account.

“This shows that during times of crisis, Parliament needs to play its role,” he said.

Scheer reiterated his party’s contention that the Commons should sit _ with reduced numbers — four days a week.

Trudeau has argued that in-person sittings present a health risk for Commons clerks, administrators, security and cleaners who’d have to come to work at a time when all Canadians are being urged to stay home to curb the spread of the deadly virus. He’s also argued that small sittings — like Saturday’s sitting of just 32 MPs who are primarily within driving distance of the capital — would shut out MPs from all corners of the country.

Trudeau’s Liberals have been promoting the idea of virtual sittings of Parliament. Commons Speaker Anthony Rota has instructed Commons administration to consult with experts about the logistics and technology required for virtual sittings, with the goal of having them up and running within four weeks.

But Scheer said: “We can’t wait that long.”

He suggested that in-person sittings should be held until virtual sittings can be implemented.

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh said he’s open to discussing either virtual sittings or “limited” in-person sittings. But Bloc Quebecois Leader Yves-Francois Blanchet said he would never agree to regular, in-person sittings.

For the past couple of weeks, the Commons finance and health committees have been meeting weekly via teleconference. As part of the deal struck with opposition parties to speedily pass the wage subsidy bill, government House leader Pablo Rodriguez said more committees — industry, government operations, human resources and procedure and House affairs — will also begin virtual meetings.

The latter committee will be specifically tasked with exploring the best ways for the Commons to function in the weeks ahead. It is to report back by May 15.

Senators separately agreed to have two Senate committees begin meeting to examine government measures to respond to the COVID-19 crisis and to set up a special committee once the pandemic is over to review lessons learned.

To satisfy the NDP and Bloc Quebecois, the government promised in the motion to speed the bill through the Commons that it would implement measures “without delay” to fill some of the gaps left by emergency aid programs.

It promised specifically to ensure financial support for Canadians who don’t currently qualify for assistance — including seasonal workers, students, owner-operators, those who’ve exhausted employment insurance benefits and those earning modest incomes from part-time work, royalties and honoraria.

It also promised to ensure essential workers who are earning low wages will receive additional support.

At the behest of the NDP, the motion was amended to add a promise that the government will not “unjustly penalize” anyone who in good faith applies for and receives emergency benefits but is subsequently found to be ineligible.

The government also promised in the motion to provide partially non-repayable loans for small and medium-sized businesses to help them cover fixed costs, such as rent.

For the most part, the sitting was notable for its lack of partisanship, with New Democrat, Green and Bloc MPs thanking the government for being open to their suggestions for improvements and ministers thanking opposition MPs for their collaboration

Conservatives, however, characterized the bill as a “fix,” required after the government botched its first emergency aid legislation two weeks ago — $107 billion worth of tax deferrals and direct financial aid, including just a 10 per cent wage subsidy.

Trudeau, who has addressed the nation daily at briefings outside his home for 26 days, spoke instead Saturday in the Commons, where he delivered a Churchillian speech invoking the heroic battles fought by Canadian troops in the First and Second World Wars.

“This is not a war. That doesn’t make this fight any less destructive, any less dangerous but there is no front line marked with barbed wire, no soldiers to be deployed across the ocean, no enemy combatants to defeat,” he said.

“Instead, the front line is everywhere. In our homes, in our hospitals and care centres, in our grocery stores and pharmacies, at our truck stops and gas stations. And the people who work in these places are our modern day heroes.”

This report by The Canadian Press was first published April 11, 2020.

RELATED

• Canadians Who Don't Qualify For CERB Are Scared They'll Fall Through Cracks

• To Cheat Or Not To Cheat? That Is The CERB Question.

• Concerns Over COVID-19 In Seniors' Homes Grow As Parliament Reconvenes

By Hans J. G. Hassell, Florida State University via The Conversation

Seven Democratic presidential candidates gathered on national television early in the 1988 campaign to debate each other.

The field of candidates, derided by Republicans as the “Seven Dwarfs,” pales in comparison to the 24 Democratic candidates who have – at last count – declared their candidacy for president.

The seven Democrats on the stage in 1988 represented an unprecedented number of candidates vying in a presidential primary. Now, 17 of the 24 declared Democratic presidential candidates have currently met the standards set by the Democratic National Committee to qualify for participation in this election cycle’s debates.

And in 2016 the GOP used two debate stages to accommodate the 17 declared candidates.

I study political parties and their role in electoral politics. And I believe the rise in the number of presidential candidates in recent years results from divisions within the party coalitions and from easier access to vital campaign resources – money and media – that were not present in previous election cycles.

The old way

Political parties are not monolithic organizations. Parties consist of a network of groups with different policy interests who work together.

For example, within the Democratic Party there are labor organizations, environmentalists and civil rights groups, each with different priorities. Each group would ideally prefer a candidate who will champion their ideas and strongly support their policy preferences.

But a primary filled with many candidates who attack one another risks harming the eventual nominee’s standing with voters.

Likewise, these divisive primaries may cause supporters of a candidate who fails to win the nomination to withhold their support of the nominee.

So to avoid the problems created by a divisive primary, these groups must coordinate behind a single candidate who may not be everyone’s – or anyone’s – first choice.

This requires the groups within the party to compromise, subordinating their group’s interests in favor of a win for the party.

In previous election cycles, where the average number of candidates who declared their candidacy and campaigned actively through the first primaries and caucuses was much smaller, these groups have worked together effectively to stand behind one candidate.

Money, media and staff

As my research shows, unified parties are able to discourage candidates from running or encourage them to drop out.

They do this by making it difficult for the candidates they don’t prefer to acquire the vital electoral resources that are necessary to win the nomination: media coverage, campaign funds and quality campaign staff.

Donors, staff and the media take cues from party elites about which candidates are the party’s choice. They are less likely to support, work for or cover those lacking the party’s support.

Reforms to the presidential nomination process in the early 1970s took choosing a nominee out of smoke-filled back rooms. But parties have continued to influence the outcome through their control of the money and other campaign resources necessary to win the nomination.

While these resources are available in abundance within the party network, they were previously harder to find outside of that network. In previous years, candidates who realized it would be hard to amass the necessary resources through party support ultimately declined to run or dropped out quickly, resulting in much smaller presidential fields.

Declining party influence

In recent years, things have changed.

Parties may still have the ability to push a candidate through the nomination when they are united. But I believe party unification and power over electoral resources has also declined in these four areas:

Click Here: COLLINGWOOD MAGPIES 2019

1. Media control

In the past, candidates were reliant on the media to publicize their candidacy and get their message to voters. Party leaders and elites consistently have better connections with the media establishment and use those connections to promote preferred candidates.

But today’s media environment allows candidates to bring their message directly to voters. Social media bypasses reporters and editors and those who have connections to them so more candidates have easier access to this key campaign resource.

2. Candidate ambitions

Before, running for president was almost entirely about advancing one’s political career. As Paul Tsongas, the former senator and presidential candidate, once said, “When you get to the Senate, half the people around you are running for president. You see them and you think you are just as good as they are…So you start to think about running yourself.”

Now, a run for higher office can be a means to other opportunities outside of politics. Republican Sen. Rick Santorum, a presidential candidate in 2016 and 2012, became a pundit on CNN. Another candidate, the GOP’s 2008 vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, ended up with a show on cable news.

While parties still pressure candidates to withdraw, candidates may be less responsive than in the past. That’s because they care less about the desires of party elites since they may not be as interested in a career in party politics.

3. Fundraising

Changes in campaign finance have also helped candidates find sufficient money outside of the party network to launch their campaign.

The rise of super PACs and other independent political entities has allowed candidates to gain access to large sums of money from a small number of donors. Campaign finance rules previously encouraged candidates to rely on a larger base of wealthy donors – many of whom took cues from party elites.

At the same time, the internet and social media have also expanded the role of small donors who are not traditionally involved in party politics. Small dollar donations have taken a more important role in campaign funding.

4. Party disunity

Lastly, party coalitions have also become more divided.

Divisions within the Republican Party coalition became more evident during the Tea Party movement. Similar ideological divisions have emerged in the last two election cycles between Democratic Party leaders and the more liberal wing of the Democratic Party. The rise of differences and divisions within the parties makes it harder for the groups within the party network to coordinate on a single candidate.

Here to stay

While the number of candidates running for president in 2020 may be unprecedented, a crowded debate stage is unlikely to be a strange sight in the future.

The divisions within parties and the availability of money and media coverage outside of the traditional party network mean that potential candidates will continue to see – and take – opportunities where previously they did not.

Hans J. G. Hassell, Assistant Professor of Political Science, Florida State University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

BIRMINGHAM, AL — The state of Alabama has been in the news all over the world in recent weeks due to a controversial bill passed banning abortion statewide, but don’t think the state is done making national headlines. Alabama Public Television made a decision not to air a May 13 episode of the animated children’s show, “Arthur,” because it portrays a same-sex wedding.

Related Story: Alabama Passes Abortion Ban

The decision by APT programming director Mike McKenzie has received backlash from LBGTQ groups and national media alike, but Mckenzie issued a statement defending the organization’s decision.

“Parents have trusted Alabama Public Television for more than 50 years to provide children’s programs that entertain, educate and inspire,” Mckenzie said in a statement. “More importantly – although we strongly encourage parents to watch television with their children and talk about what they have learned afterwards – parents trust that their children can watch APT without their supervision. We also know that children who are younger than the ‘target’ audience for Arthur also watch the program.”

The show is a joint Canadian/American series which debuted in 1996 about an eight-year-old aardvark named Arthur Read and his friends, who live in the fictional Elwood City. The May 13 episode centers on teacher Mr. Ratburn’s marriage to a man. A 2005 episode that portrayed a rabbit with two mothers was also pulled from programming at APT, according to an NBC report.

The episode has been praised by many, and criticized by some who feel the show is “grooming” children to participate in an LBGTQ+ lifestyle, according to a BBC report.

The episode can be viewed on pbs.org.

A Colorado State Patrol trooper was hit and killed by a vehicle Friday night while investigating a crash, the Colorado State Patrol said.

Trooper William Moden, 37, stopped to investigate a crash on Interstate 70 near Deer Trail in eastern Colorado at about 9:40 p.m. on Friday, CSP said. Moden was struck by a car at the scene.

He was taken to the University of Colorado Hospital in Denver, where he died.

The crash is under investigation.

“Trooper William Moden loved his family and loved being a Colorado State Trooper,” said Col. Matthew Packard, chief of the state patrol. “All he wanted to do was make a difference.”

Moden had worked as a state trooper for 12 years. Packard described him as a “tremendous servant.”

“I’m a better trooper because I knew Will Moden,” Packard said.

Moden was described as having a big heart and an infectious smile.

“Our hearts are heavy and he will be sorely missed,” CSP tweeted.

Click Here: brisbane lions guernsey 2019

Plus de 28.000 espèces de plantes sont actuellement répertoriées comme ayant un usage médical, révèle un rapport publié jeudi par le centre de recherche botanique des Kew Gardens de Londres.

Le rapport recense 28.187 plantes aux propriétés médicinales, un chiffre en progression de 59% par rapport à 2016.

Sommaire

1. Phytothérapie : un énorme potentiel thérapeutique absent des publications médicales
2. Risques liés à la mondialisation

Au total, le rapport, qui a pour ambition de dresser un état des lieux des plantes dans le monde et dont c’est la deuxième édition, recense 28.187 plantes aux propriétés médicinales, un chiffre en progression de 59% par rapport à 2016 et “probablement très prudent“.Phytothérapie : un énorme potentiel thérapeutique absent des publications médicales”Ce rapport souligne l’énorme potentiel des plantes dans des domaines comme le 

diabète et le 

paludisme“, a expliqué à l’AFP Monique Simmonds, directrice scientifique adjointe des Kew Gardens.

• Parmi les nouvelles variétés découvertes figurent neuf espèces d’une plante grimpante appelé Mucuna, utilisée dans le traitement de la

  maladie de Parkinson.

• L’artémisinine et la quinine, deux substances issues des plantes, “sont parmi les armes les plus importantes dans notre arsenal pour lutter contre la malaria, dont 214 millions de cas et 400.000 décès ont été recensés en 2015“, rappelle le rapport.

Malgré leur potentiel, moins de 16% des espèces utilisées dans des remèdes sont citées dans des publications médicales, note le rapport.Au total, 128 scientifiques de 12 pays différents ont travaillé à l’élaboration de cette publication, qui souligne la découverte de 1.730 nouvelles espèces par rapport à l’année dernière.Parmi elles figurent cinq nouvelles espèces de manihot, une variante du

manioc, découvertes au Brésil et qui “ont le potentiel d’augmenter les récoltes de manioc en les diversifiant“, constituant ainsi “une nourriture du futur“.

Risques liés à la mondialisationLe rapport a aussi suivi la destruction de plantes en analysant des images satellites. Les chercheurs ont ainsi découvert qu’au cours des 16 dernières années, “une moyenne de 340 millions d’hectares de la planète brûlent chaque année“, soit grosso modo “la taille de l’Inde“, a précisé à l’AFP le docteur Sarah Wyse, qui a contribué au rapport.

Mais si ce chiffre semble alarmant, Mme Wyse a souligné que certaines plantes ont besoin de ces incendies “pour se régénérer“. “Ces feux ne sont pas en soi une mauvaise chose pour de nombreux écosystèmes, parce que la plupart des plantes s’adaptent au feu“, a-t-elle dit.Le rapport a également calculé que “le coût potentiel pour l’agriculture mondiale si la propagation de parasites invasifs et pathogènes n’est pas stoppée” est de “540 milliards de dollars (492 milliards d’euros) par an“.Il souligne la nécessité de “mesures de biosécurité plus strictes“, notamment pour le commerce des plantes vivantes. La mondialisation du commerce et les voyages internationaux facilitent, par exemple, la dissémination des criquets et autres chenilles légionnaires, particulièrement destructrices pour le maïs.Le domaine des Kew Gardens, installé à l’ouest de Londres, abrite l’une des plus importantes collections de plantes de la planète dans ses serres et ses magnifiques jardins. C’est également un centre de recherche botanique mondialement connu qui veut faire de son “State of the World’s Plants” un outil de référence.Click Here: brisbane lions guernsey 2019

L’énurésie est le terme médical pour désigner le fait d’uriner involontairement pendant la nuit. On parle "d’énurésie" lorsque l’enfant a 5ans ou plus. On estime aujourd’hui que 4,4% des enfants entre 6 et 14 ans en souffrent.

Sommaire

1. Pipi au lit : 10% des enfants de 7-10 ans concernés
2. Punir l’enfant est contre-productif
3. Des parents souvent désarmés
4. Enurésie : des solutions existent !

Pipi au lit : 10% des enfants de 7-10 ans concernésSi votre enfant continue de faire pipi au lit pendant son sommeil, il peut être question d’énurésie. En effet, ce syndrome “pipi au lit” constitue parfois une réelle affection qu’il est important de prendre en charge. Pour le docteur Lottmann, spécialisé en urologie pédiatrique à l’hôpital Necker de Paris, ce trouble n’est pas à prendre à la légère : “Au total, nous considérons que 10% des enfants dans la tranche d’âge 7-10 ans font encore pipi au lit la nuit. Puis ce taux diminue d’environ 1% par an, car il y a une guérison spontanée. Mais elle peut persister, à tel point que de 1% à 3% des plus de 18 ans souffrent d’énurésie“¹.Punir l’enfant est contre-productifLes répercussions de cette affection peuvent être multiples : une faible estime de soi, un sentiment de culpabilité et de honte mais aussi un développement de l’anxiété et un isolement.Ne sachant comment réagir, certains parents punissent leurs enfants. En plus de fragiliser psychologiquement l’enfant, ces sanctions n’auront aucune utilité. Aujourd’hui, on sait que l’énurésie diminue plus rapidement chez les enfants n’ayant pas subi de punition (59,2%) par rapport à ceux qui ont été punis (40,7%)².

Des parents souvent désarmésSouvent désarmés, les parents ignorent les

causes de ces fuites nocturnes : 39% d’entre eux ne les connaissent pas, mais 56% optent pour le sommeil profond.Pour une grande partie des parents, les enfants sont responsables de ces accidents nocturnes : 26% pensent que l’enfant n’a pas envie de se lever de son lit et au total, c’est 42% qui pensent que leurs enfants font volontairement pipi au lit !Enurésie : des solutions existent !Afin de gérer au mieux ses fuites urinaires, l’idéal est de consulter un médecin et d’oser poser la question, car elle n’est pas toujours soulevée spontanément par le professionnel, ni même évoquée par les parents.55% seulement des parents déclarent vouloir consulter un professionnel de santé pour l’énurésie de leur enfant et seulement 28% seulement connaissent l’existence de traitements³. Concrètement, la prise en charge de l’énurésie nocturne passe par des mesures hygiéno-diététiques (

des conseils simples à suivre incluant des protections, des alèses, une réduction des boissons après 18h…), voire un traitement médicamenteux après l’âge de 6 ans (

desmopressine et en cas d’échec

oxybutynine) sous contrôle médical, des alarmes déclenchées par la fuite urinaire, voire une psychothérapie en cas de troubles associés.

Le régime méditerranéen, riche en aliments végétaux, est connu pour avoir de nombreux bénéfices pour la santé, y compris une réduction du risque de maladie d’Alzheimer. Aujourd’hui, des chercheurs américains ont identifié l’ingrédient qui protège spécifiquement contre le déclin cognitif: l’huile d’olive extra vierge.

L'huile d'olive serait à l'origine de l'effet protecteur du régime méditerranéen vis-à-vis d'Alzheimer.

Sommaire

1. L’huile d’olive extra vierge, utile pour prévenir Alzheimer ?
2. Une nouvelle vertu du régime méditerranéen 

Des études antérieures ont suggéré que la consommation d’

huile d’olive vierge extra du bassin méditerranéen pouvait expliquer une grande partie des nombreux avantages pour la santé liés au fameux régime méditerranéen. “Nous pensons que l’huile d’olive extra vierge est meilleure que les fruits et les légumes seuls, et comme une graisse végétale monoinsaturée, elle est plus saine que les graisses animales saturées”, selon le Dr Praticò.L’huile d’olive extra vierge, utile pour prévenir Alzheimer ?Pour étudier l’effet de l’huile d’olive extra vierge et la démence, l’équipe du Dr Praticò s’est appuyé sur un modèle de souris de la maladie d’Alzheimer. Les chercheurs ont réparti les animaux en deux groupes : les uns recevant en plus de leur régime classique de l’huile d’olive extra vierge et les autres non. L’huile d’olive a été ajoutée dans le régime alimentaire lorsque les souris avaient 6 mois avant que les symptômes de la maladie d’Alzheimer n’apparaissent. En apparence, aucune différence entre les deux groupes d’animaux n’a été constatée. Mais à l’âge de 9 mois et 12 mois, les souris suivant le régime enrichi en huile d’olive extra vierge ont nettement amélioré leurs résultats sur les tests conçus pour évaluer la mémoire de travail, la mémoire spatiale et les capacités d’apprentissage.

Les études sur le tissu cérébral des deux groupes de souris ont révélé des différences importantes dans l’apparence et la fonction des cellules nerveuses. L’intégrité des connexions entre les neurones (les synapses) a été conservée chez les animaux sur le régime d’huile d’olive extra-vierge. Par rapport aux souris ayant un régime régulier, les cellules du cerveau des animaux du groupe de l’huile d’olive ont montré une augmentation spectaculaire du processus d’autophagie des cellules nerveuses. L’autophagie est le processus par lequel les cellules se décomposent et éliminent les débris intracellulaires et les toxines, telles que les plaques amyloïdes et les protéines Tau liées à la maladie d’Alzheimer.Une nouvelle vertu du régime méditerranéen “C’est une découverte excitante pour nous” a expliqué Dr. Praticò. “Grâce à l’activation de l’autophagie, la mémoire et l’intégrité synaptique ont été préservées et les effets pathologiques chez les animaux normalement destinés à développer la maladie d’Alzheimer ont été considérablement réduits. C’est une découverte très importante, car nous soupçonnons qu’une réduction de l’autophagie marque le début de la maladie d’Alzheimer“.Prochaine étape : les chercheurs vont évaluer les effets de l’introduction de l’huile d’olive chez des souris plus âgées ayant déjà développé des plaques amyloïdes. “Habituellement, lorsqu’un patient voit un médecin pour une possible démence, la maladie est déjà présente. Nous voulons donc savoir si l’ajout d’huile d’olive à l’alimentation peut arrêter ou inverser la maladie” conclut le Dr Praticò.Cette étude chez l’animal ne peut être extrapolée directement à l’homme, néanmoins les bénéfices du régime méditerranéen (notamment sur la santé cardiovasculaire) étant connus de longue date, vous ne risquez rien à l’adopter !Click Here: new zealand rugby team jerseys