Air Force One’s new refrigerators will cost taxpayers $24 million

Air Force One, which carries the President of the United States, is getting two new refrigerators. These two new chillers will cost taxpayers a grand total of $23,657,671. This high cost includes the cost of testing and certification, as Air Force One has very specific requirements, and contractors must have high-level security clearances. The previous refrigerators were installed in 1990. They were designed for short term food storage; however, Air Force One reportedly needs storage room for 3,000 meals to cover passengers and personnel. They want to be able to refrigerate enough food for a long enough time so that there is no need to buy food at their destination.

In December 2016, President Trump had criticized the $4 billion plan to replace VC-25As. The plane the president has been riding in has been operating for over 20 years now. I do not object to the replacement of the chillers, as they must be a bit out of date and worn out after such a long time in use. However, even though it is the president they are serving who is bound to have a ton of personnel aboard, I do believe the requirements are a bit lavish and unnecessary. If these new chillers can last another 20 years it may be more worth it, but it might just outlast the plane.

What are your thoughts?
Do you think $24 million is a reasonable price to pay the two chillers for Air Force One?
Is this a good investment?

Sources:
Business Insider
Washington Post

EPA ends clean air policy opposed by fossil fuel interests

One of the government agencies we have learned about in class, the Environmental Protection Agency, has announced that it will be withdrawing the “once-in always-in” policy under the Clean Air Act, which dictated how major sources of hazardous air pollutants are regulated. The Clean Air Act defined "major sources" as one that has the potential to emit 10 tons or more per year of any hazardous air pollutant, or 25 tons per year of any combination of hazardous air pollutants, and the “once-in always-in” policy required major sources to remain subject to these stricter control standards, even if steps were taken to reduce pollution below the threshold. However, without the “once-in always-in” policy, these“major sources” like coal-fired power plants can be reclassified as “area sources” when their emissions dip below required limits, subjecting them to differing, more lenient standards.

Senate Environment Committee Chairman John Barrasso of Wyoming says that the “withdrawal of this policy means manufacturers, oil and gas operations, and other types of industrial facilities will have greater incentive to reduce emissions,” while environmentalists say that this change will "drastically weaken limits on toxic heavy metals emitted from power-plant smokestacks."

In my opinion, this is an awful decision on the EPA's part. They are supposed to be the Environmental Protection Agency, not the Environmental Pollution Agency. Sure, fewer environmental regulations on businesses will generate more profit, but at what cost? If you want to experience first-hand the effects of not having strict pollution standards, go to any major Chinese city and take a nice, deep breath. Bureaucratic red tape may be obtrusive, but the EPA was one of the few things that improved the quality of life for the average American citizen. Now, thanks to regulatory capture, the EPA is now the antithesis of what it is supposed to represent.

Can we trust federal agencies to do the right thing in this day and age? 

https://www.apnews.com/646836ad590c4230b730fc17cfbcb967/EPA-ends-clean-air-policy-opposed-by-fossil-fuel-interests

Company shoots shiny orb into orbit and angers astronomers over ‘space graffiti.’

A private company based in New Zealand, Rocket Lab, recently launched a flashy satellite into orbit around Earth. This reflective sphere has 65 faces and is called the Humanity Star. Its name stems from the idea that this sphere will temporarily light up the sky, drawing human attention to the fact that we are but a speck of dust in this universe, and allow everyone to feel a connection to this great expanse of universe we are a part of. It would orbit around Earth for 9 months before it begins to decay and gets burned up entering the atmosphere.

What astronomers are worried about, in this case, is not that it would increase the amount of space debris in the atmosphere, but rather that this disco ball satellite would disrupt their research. As this shining ball flashes across the sky, it could pass through the field of view of observatories and affect data collection. This light pollution affects all those who look towards the stars.

Although the intentions behind the Humanity Star are noble and good, I believe they did not place enough consideration on the effects of sending this satellite into space. This may be fine once, but I do not think it would be a good idea for similar satellites to be sent into space. There are already issues of space traffic and light pollution.

What are your thoughts on the Humanity Star? Would you like to see more?

Sources:
Humanity Star (track its path)
Washington Post
The Guardian

Scientists Rebel Against a Trump Ally at the Natural History Museum

Rebekah Mercer, a board member of the American Museum of Natural History since 2013, is being pressured by more than 200 scientists and other academics to step down from her position. Mercer is the daughter of billionaire Robert Mercer, and she earned her master's from Stanford University in management science and engineering. Rebekah Mercer and the Mercer family are huge Republican donors, and have donated millions in support of conservative causes, including support for groups that reject climate science.

Scientists claim that having Mercer on the board raises public doubt, and will lower the credibility of natural history museums which 78% of Americans believe is a trustworthy source of information. Although the AMNH states that educational content is determined by the scientists and not decided by the donors, many still suspect there may be bits of misinformation that still get put out. Nonprofit organizations rely on donors such as Mercer; however, considering her history of donating to groups that deny climate science, I question her motives. Having contributed so much, it would be difficult for the institution to ignore her requests if she had any in mind, and I find that influence on educational content worrying.

Do you believe a donor such as Mercer's background should affect her position on the board?
If Mercer does not step down, do you think public trust in museums will be affected?

Sources:
NYTimes
Huffington Post

Chinese Scientists Successfully Clone Two Monkeys

Article Link

Picture Link

Summary:

Recently, scientists in China have cloned two monkeys by the names of Zhong Zhong and Hua Hua. This event is significant because it is the first time that primates have been cloned ever. Ever since Dolly the Sheep was cloned in 1996, scientists have replicated the process with other types of animals but never primates until just recently. By cloning monkeys, scientists get closer to figuring out if it is possible to clone a human being. Although scientists claim they will only be using the clones for medical studies, it is likely that the process used on the monkeys will be studied to see if it is able to be replicated on humans. One important point is that it took over 125 different trials on different eggs until they were able to clone successfully. This means that the process will most likely not be used on humans any time soon because of the high probability of failure.

Opinion/Connection:

This scientific breakthrough relates to what we are currently learning about the court system. We currently have laws regulating the ways that humans are to be used as test subjects and these laws follow a code of ethics. The same principle applies to cloning and I anticipate that there will be lots of debating morals in the future about if it is ethical to clone a human being. This will likely be decided in a court of law either on a country by country basis or as an international decision. Personally, I think that even if cloning humans is banned, it will eventually happen. I also think that cloning could introduce tons of new problems in the way of national security.

Question:

Scientific advancements tend to solve problems but also can create new, possibly more dangerous issues in our world. Do you think that cloning will be an overall positive or negative discovery?

New tariff could harm the U.S. solar industry economically

Article link

A good article to read as we transition to our study of economics next week...President Trump's decision to place a 30% tariff is being done with the intention of protecting domestic solar companies, but it also has the potential to harm the fastest growing industry in terms of jobs. President Obama also placed tariffs on Chinese solar panels as a response to government subsidies which led to cheap foreign panels flooding the U.S. market. The author of the story's analogy is that "if the old tariffs represented closing the barn door after the horse has bolted, the new measures amount to putting a lock on the door."

Discussion Questions
1. Do you believe Trump's tariff on solar panels will help or hurt the U.S. solar industry economically?
2. The author suggests focusing on research and development--can U.S. companies design next generation solar panels to get market share back from China?
3. Is there still a bright future for the U.S. solar industry despite extensive international competition?

Senate Confirms Trump Nominee Alex Azar as Health Secretary

The Senate confirmed Alex M. Azar II as the secretary of the health and human services, with a vote of 55-43. Azar graduated from Yale Law School, served as a law clerk under Justice Antonin Scalia, and was a former drug company executive. He will now be responsible for handling a trillion dollar budget that oversees Medicare and Medicaid, and the Obamacare health reform law.

His priorities include tackling the opioid epidemic, finding a way for healthcare providers to be paid by patient outcome rather than the number of tests run, and making healthcare more affordable. He is also under pressure to constrain drug prices; however, Azar himself has admitted that drug prices are too high, but has shown little action to change it, stating that lowering drug prices is a complex task. Under his watch in the company Eli Lilly, the price of Forteo was doubled, as well as additional drugs.

What do you think of this nomination? Do you think the HHS is in good hands?
Do you believe his experience as a former drug company executive is an asset or the opposite?

Sources:
NYTimes
The Washington Post

School Shooting in Kentucky Was Nation’s 11th of Year. It Was Jan. 23.

Article Link

On Tuesday, 2 teenagers were killed and 18 were injured in a school shooting in Benton, Kentucky. So far, this is the 11th school shooting recorded since January 1st, 2018.  Katherine W. Schweit, a former senior F.B.I. official, said, “We have absolutely become numb to these kinds of shootings, and I think that will continue.” According to the governor of Kentucky, the gunman was a 15-year-old student. He was taken into custody and will be tried for 2 counts of murder and several counts of attempted murder. However, the authorities have not decided whether or not to try him as an adult or as a juvenile.

 Last year, a bill allowing people with concealed-carry permits to take weapons onto public school campuses was considered, but it did not pass. This year, a similar bill, but for college campuses and certain government building, is being considered.

 In my opinion, this will probably not affect the passage (or veto) of the bill for concealed-carry permits on college campuses. Benton is a small town, and the legislator of Kentucky have many other things to take into consideration. I was actually unaware of the previous 10 shootings that have happened this year, but I think media should have covered it more, even if no one died. This potential bill is definitely something that will affect the future of carrying weapons on campus, even in other states.

- Do you think the shooter should be tried as an adult or a juvenile?

- Do you think the bill will pass this year?

- How might the bill affect other states who have tried to pass similar bills in the past? Will it encourage them to try again? Or will it deter people from voting on it? 

Trump Leaves it to the Military to Deal With Climate Change

Article Link

SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images

Summary:

Last week, Trump released the National Defense Strategy for the United States and in it there was no mention of climate change. This is clearly an issue because rising oceans and melting ice shelves affects how the military should be approaching certain problems. The article goes on to state that the military is being proactive on the issue by enforcing their own climate change policy because Trump refuses to acknowledge this problem.

Opinion:

Trump is stupid. He clearly doesn't understand that a Country is not a business where making money is the only concern. Although ignoring climate change will save money, it ignores a huge problem in our world that could come back to haunt us later. In general, pretending problems don't exist is just a recipe for disaster. I am also personally against anyone that rejects conclusions based on solid scientific studies and clear evidence.

Questions:

Do you think there will be a large backlash from other countries in the future because Trump refuses to acknowledge climate change?

What are your opinions on the best way to address climate change?

Trump administration bars Haitians from U.S. visas for low-skilled work

Haitians will no longer be eligible for U.S. visas given to low-skilled workers, which brings an end to a relief program that helped unemployed Haitians after a devastating 2010 earthquake. The Department of Homeland Security cites "high levels of fraud and abuse” and a “high rate of overstaying the terms” as the reason behind barring these unskilled workers. This sudden change towards Haitian workers comes a week after Trump allegedly referred to Haiti and several African nations as "shithole countries." Other than Haiti, Belize and Samoa were also removed from this visa program, with "human trafficking and not taking back nationals" being cited as the reasons why.

In 2016, 65 Haitians entered the United States on H-2A visas, given for agricultural work, and 54 Haitians were given H-2A visas by the State Department between March and November 2017.

Supporters of the visas say they gave Haitians a rare opportunity to work legally in the United States, and now without H-2 visas, there are very few legal ways into the United States for most Haitians. 

Personally, I don't think we should be giving these types of visas to anyone. After all, there are a significant number of unemployed people here in the United States who don't need the competition for jobs. I see these work visas as a way for employers to exploit these Haitians and other types of unskilled workers for lower pay and longer hours.

Do you think removing Haiti from this visa program is justified? Are the cited reasons for doing so acceptable or do you believe there are other ulterior motives?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-haiti/trump-administration-bars-haitians-from-u-s-visas-for-low-skilled-work-idUSKBN1F702O

Larry Nassar Was A Master Manipulator, But He Didn’t Act Alone

Article Linked Here

Dr. Lawrence Nassar, the former USA gymnastics national team osteopathic physician, since September of 2016, has been accused of sexually abusing and molesting over 140 women, including 3 of the 5 Final Five: Raisman, Douglas and Biles. Many public allegations have been from former Olympic gymnasts. Nassar was also involved with Michigan State University as the athletic trainer. Currently, he has plead guilty to 7 counts of first-degree sexual assault and 3 additional charges of sexual assault, and has been sentenced to at least 60 years in prison for federal child pornography charges.

Also, there has been severe criticism (as there should be) due to USA Gymnastics’ and MSU’s handling of the situation. According to previous a 2016 investigation, USA Gymnastics dismissed the allegations and failed to report it to authorities. MSU reported that their first complaint was received in 2014, but after some investigating, no violation was found, and Nassar was allowed to continue practicing with restrictions. Yesterday, 3 members of the USAG Board of Directors resigned. Kathie Klages, the former Michigan gymnastics coach, retired in 2017 amidst the allegations and investigation. People are pushing for the current president Lou Ann Simon to resign, but seems unlikely as of now.

For the last few days, Nassar’s victims have been going up to the stand and testifying against him at his sentencing hearing. The hearing is being held at Ingham Circuit Court in Lansing, Michigan. This event relates back to government and the courts obviously because of the current hearing. In my opinion, USA Gymnastics and MSU should have taken immediate action regarding the allegations, but as we have all seen recently, sexual abuse victims are often brushed off and disregarded. This is also connected to the recent #MeToo movement.

1. What do you think that these organizations should have done and should do in the future to prevent anything like this from happening again?
2. What do you think will happen to athletic doctors/trainers in any other field? Will more stricter restrictions take place? More background checks?

Government Shutdown Ends

Article Link

As most of you already know, the government was shut down for a brief period of time because the budget could not be agreed upon in Congress and a deadline forced a shutdown of our government. Today (Monday), a short-term spending bill was passed by the House, the Senate, and then signed by Trump. This bill does not mean that congress has come to an agreement on the budget and its passage only provided funding until February 8th. There will still be much debate in the future about many government policies like DACA, immigration, military spending, disaster relief, and health care before a full budget bill can be passed.

Our government has been especially problematic recently on agreeing on certain topics which makes it very difficult to pass legislation in Congress like budget bills. This makes me worry because the Republicans control every branch of government and therefore should be able to implement their policies without much opposition. This phenomenon either signifies a divided Republican party or an ineffective American governmental system. Either way, I feel like the remaining years of Trump's presidency are not going to be any easier.

Questions:

1. Do you think both parties will be able to come to an agreement on immigration policies before the short-term bill expires?

2. Do you think that the government shutdown will make the Democrats and Republicans want to work together more or will it just drive them farther apart.

Communication Breakdown Leads to Government Shutdown

Article Link

                                           President Trump at the White House on Friday, Al Drago, NY Times

Two weeks ago, President Trump promised to agree to a bipartisan deal that would protect dreamers (undocumented immigrants brought to the U.S. as children). Yet when that deal was presented to him he balked, complaining of the shi*hole countries where these immigrants come from. On Friday he would not agree to a plan presented by Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer leading to a weekend government shutdown, which is unprecedented when one party controls both the executive and legislative branches. While financial markets have responded well to Trump other nations have not and the damage to American credibility remains to be determined.

Discussion Questions
1. Are Senate Republican, Senate Democrats, the President, or some combination of them to blame for the recent government shutdown?
2. Should Trump be credited for the growth of the economy over the past year or should he be criticized for potential damage to American international credibility?
3. What do you expect that Trump may say about the budget and foreign policy in next week's State of the Union address?

9 of 12 National Park Service advisory board members quit in disgust

Article Link

Summary:

9 of the 12 members of the advisory board for the National Park Service resigned because of Interior Secretary, Ryan Zinke. The board members stated Zinke ignored their requests to meet and has "set aside" protection of the National Parks. 
The Board chairman, Tony Knowles, stated in his letter that "Our requests to engage have been ignored and the matters on which we wanted to brief the new department team are clearly not part of its agenda. I have profound concern that the mission of stewardship, protection, and advancement of our National Parks has been set aside."
Knowles has also informed the media that the board has yet to convene since Trump took office, despite regulations, and the board has been left out of recent decisions about the park systems. 
Along with Knowles, Gretchen Long, Paul Bardacke, Carolyn Finney, Judy Burke, Stephen Pitti, Milton Chen, Belinda Faustinos, and Margaret Wheatley have also resigned, leaving only 3 members.

Questions:

1. Why do you think Zinke wad "freezing out" the former board members?

2. What do you think the National Park Service will do in response to the protest/resignation?

US Cuts Funding for Palestinians Following Trump's Twitter Threat

Article Link

Summary:

The US announced the funds given to the UN that support Palestinians will be cut by more than half. This action occurs two weeks after Trump threatened to pull funding. This controversial decision has received negative feedback from Palestine, positive praise from Israel, and it has caused concern from the UN because of the humanitarian impact of the decision.
 The United States was supposed to pay 125 million dollars to the United Nations Relief Works Agency, but now will only be paying 60 million dollars. This agency provides aid, medical care, and education to Palestinian refugees across the Middle East. 
The State Department spokeswoman, Heather Nauert, claims this decision was made with no intention to punish the Palestinians for refusing to negotiate with Israel. But a few weeks earlier Trump tweeted, "It's not only Pakistan that we pay billions of dollars to for nothing, but also many other countries, and others. As an example, we pay the Palestinians HUNDRED OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS a year and get no appreciation or respect. They don’t even want to negotiate a long overdue..." 
The UN had spoken out about these actions, and hopes that the US and Trump Administration will reverse the cut before it severely effects the Middle East.

Questions:

1. Do you believe Trump was justified in cutting the funds, or do you believe the Trump Administration should try to reverse the cut, and why?

2. If the funding remains as is, what do you think the UN should do?

First Amazon Go Store to Open to the Public on Monday

The first Amazon Go store in Seattle, Washington will open to the public tomorrow. The store's design allows for a shopping experience that requires no long checkout lines - customers simply scan their phone at the entrance and then the Amazon Go store's hundreds or cameras and weight sensors detect what each customer is buying. While there are chefs that make food and people who restock the shelves, there are no cashiers. Customers simply walk right out the door with their tracked purchases, which some people say "feels like shoplifting." Amazon has also taken many measures to prevent shoplifting. All of their cameras use computer vision for object recognition and motion tracking in order to track each one of the customers inside the store, although Amazon claims that their cameras do not use facial recognition. Amazon has not made their future plans for this technology clear yet.

Many people have concerns about the store. There are hundreds of cameras throughout the store, causing many customers to worry about their privacy since their every movement is tracked. Many people are also worried that cashiers will start losing their jobs, but Amazon claims that they are simply "changing the role" of cashiers.

Cameras on the ceiling of the Amazon Go store:


What do you guys think of this new technology - do you think it will spread beyond the first Amazon Go store? Also, do you guys have concerns about privacy and the jobs of cashiers?

Sources:
Reuters
New York Times
TechCrunch

Lil Pump Drops i Shyne

"2017 has proven to be a banner year for Pump, as he scored a top 5 single on the Billboard Hot 100 with 'Gucci Gang.'" Many are familiar with the lines:

"Gucci gang, Gucci gang, Gucci gang, Gucci gang
Gucci gang, Gucci gang, Gucci gang (Gucci gang!)"

Just a few weeks ago, Lil Pump released dropped "Designer."  This song was a response to the criticism of his huge hit "Gucci Gang" that was filmed at "a local catholic school." Recently, he dropped "i Shyne" after leaving his label company.

A young rapper, almost the same age as us, has proven to be extremely successful. But can he continue it? What are your thoughts on Lil Pump's career? Do you think he can release more songs that scores a top 5 single?  How has he changed the rap culture and the music industry?

Some people out there think his lyrics are offensive, but this is a country of free speech. What are your opinions on free speech in music, especially in the rap culture?



https://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/hip-hop/8078698/lil-pump-new-song-designer
https://www.billboard.com/articles/news/dance/8095033/lil-pump-carnage-i-shyne-listen

Delta Air Lines Tightens Rules for Service and Support Animals

On Friday January 19, Delta Air Lines announced that it was "tightening its rules for transporting service and support animals in an effort to reduce misbehavior by dogs and other creatures." Support animals are specially trained to assist people with disabilities and emotional support animals provide comfort and companionship to their owners (training not required). By law, air carriers are required to allow service animals on board. This policy is by far the most demanding among other carriers as it asks for documentation about the animal's health and promise of good conduct starting March 1, 2018, largely due to people attempting "to fly with comfort turkeys, gliding possums known as sugar gliders, snakes, spiders and more.”

After reading this article, I kinda understand why Delta Air Lines have decided to increase the rules for service and support animals, but I feel like most of the people who do carry animals on board depend on them, hence should not be restricted to bringing them. With the Disabilities Act in place, Delta Air Lines are about to get troubled waters.

What do you guys think of this new regulation? Can it potentially violate the Disabilities Act? Is Delta Air Lines taking this issue way too far?

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/19/business/delta-airlines-service-animals.html

Chinese Car Manufacturers Wants in on U.S Market

Enverge Electric Concept Vehicle made by GAC, a Chinese auto company headquartered in Guangzhou

American car companies like Ford and General Motors have always wondered when a Chinese Manufacturer would enter the U.S Market because of the fact that China is one of the world's largest producer of automobiles. They are finally given an answer: 2019. Days after the Detroit auto show on Monday, GAC Motor announced that they plan to operate in the U.S and begin selling vehicles next year. Currently, the GAC Motor car company is looking at a possible partnership with Fiat Chrysler Automobiles. Fiat Chrysler is an Italian-American company (Fiat: Italian and Chrysler: American). 

I believe that this partnership could boost revenues for both GAC Motor and Fiat Chrysler if this partnership is made possible since Fiat Chrysler is currently the 8th biggest automobile company. In addition, I strongly feel that more Chinese Car Companies will start to invest in the U.S Market. Not only does this benefit the automobile makers, but it also can boost our economy. I like that. 

Do you think the partnership with Fiat Chrysler will make a huge difference for both companies? Will this deal greatly impact other American car companies? Or do you think that this investment will be a disappointment to Chinese Car Manufacturers?

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/15/business/chinese-cars-fiat-chrysler.html

Pay to Drive in Manhattan?

Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo proposed a Congestion Plan that charges drivers $11.52 to drive a car into the busiest parts of Manhattan. There have been similar traffic charges in major cities like Singapore, Stockholm, London and Milan; however, New York has previously rejected this proposal. The intention of Andrew Cuomo's Congestion Plan is to improve traffic flow in Manhattan while raising urgent revenue for the city's failing subways and buses. The cost for vehicles vary. For example, driving a truck in Manhattan would cost $25.34 while a regular sedan would only cost $11.52.

I personally believe this Congestion Plan to be ridiculous. Just think about all the tilt that would immediately arise from this plan. I understand that the city needs a source of revenue, but charging drivers to drive in Manhattan is just absurd. Even though driving is often said to be a privilege, it shouldn't be a payment of any kind.

What are your thoughts on this new Congestion Plan? Do you think this plan will improve traffic flow in Manhattan? How would the residents and tourists respond to this plan?

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/18/nyregion/driving-manhattan-congestion-traffic.html

Fake Bomb: Reality TV Crew Arrested For Trying To Smuggle Pretend Explosives Onto Plane

Now that I've talked about an event revealing the flaws of airport security, here is an instance where security actually succeeded (kind of). A film crew was arrested at Newark International Airport, New Jersey on Thursday for allegedly attempting to smuggle a fake bomb through security. The crew, who was reportedly contracted by CNBC, was filming for a reality TV show called Staten Island Hustle. According to the New York Daily News, the TV crew knew they were going to get caught, but wanted to capture on film the reactions of the officers and the subsequent panic that would ensue. After the TSA discovered an item which had the makings of an IED, a TSA bomb tech who happened to be at the checkpoint investigated the "bomb" and determined that it was fake.

Even though the bomb was fake, this event does show that the TSA have a system that works in the event of a real situation, which is reassuring after the news about Marilyn Hartman the "serial stowaway". Without this happening, it would have been hard to show the public that the TSA can be reliable when it comes to stopping potential attacks (other than an actual attack, which would suck). However, I can't comprehend why the TV crew would think it's a good idea to smuggle a fake bomb into an airport. The only logical reason I could think of would be for some kind of test to make sure that airport security was safe (if they did this, they should close the airport, not stage an actual bomb threat), but this doesn't seem to be the case. It was irresponsible and immature to pull this kind of stunt in a public area, especially in an airport, with something as threatening as a bomb.

Source 1
Source 2

Facebook To Prioritize 'Trustworthy' Publishers In News Feed

Mark Zuckerberg announced through a Facebook post yesterday that there are some changes that will be made to Facebook's "News Feed," in which users see posts and activity of their friends and family as well as organizations, news sources, and other sources. Facebook will begin surfacing news content based on the "trustworthiness" of those news sources, as determined by ongoing user surveys (rather than by Facebook itself).

In my opinion, I am tentative about these changes. While they may be a good measure to eliminate untrustworthy news sources, I think that the political views of users will influence how they rate the "trustworthiness" of news sources. For example, someone with conservative political views may rate a liberal-leaning news source, such as the New York Times, as not being very trustworthy simply because it is a "liberal" news source (and vice versa).

What do you guys think of these changes to Facebook's News Feed? Do you think it will stop the spread of misinformation or become a sort of user-driven censorship? For those of you that use Facebook somewhat regularly, do you think this will affect your news feed?

Sources:
Forbes
Reuters
Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook

Serial plane stowaway foils TSA again

Marilyn Hartman is a 66-year-old "serial stowaway" who has made a habit out of sneaking through airport security onto airplanes. She was arrested last Thursday on January 18th at Heathrow Airport in England after stowing away on an airplane and flying all the way from O'Hare Airport in Chicago. Hartman has been arrested at least 10 times attempting to duck through airport security, getting caught eight times in 2014 and twice in 2015. According to Chicago Police, Hartman was able to avoid the gate attendant by "blending in with the passengers". They did not however, reveal how she was able to get past the TSA checkpoints. While a TSA spokesperson did say Hartman was screened at the checkpoint, she was somehow able to get through without a ticket. Once on the aircraft, she hid in the bathroom then proceeded to find an empty seat. Upon reaching Heathrow, Hartman was caught without a passport and was sent back to the US where she was arrested upon arrival.

What confuses me in this event is the fact that Hartman was screened by the TSA, yet was able to get through the checkpoint without being asked for a ticket. Normally at airports, passengers are asked to show their boarding passes before going through security. These checkpoints are often tightly managed and it is easy to catch someone attempting to get passed them. The airport's inability to catch Hartman poses some serious questions about TSA's methods or the employees working there. While Hartman herself is (hopefully) not a dangerous individual, the revelation that somebody could get through the checkpoint is problematic.

Source

Government Shuts Down After Senate Fails to Pass Spending Bill

Late Friday night, the Senate failed to pass the short term spending bill. It was a close party-line vote, with almost all Republicans voting yes and almost all Democrats voting no. Five republicans, including Lindsey Graham (SC) and Jeff Flake (AZ), voted against the bill while five Democrats, four of whom are running in the 2018 midterm elections and one of whom is the recently elected Doug Jones (AL), voted for the bill. John McCain was undergoing cancer treatment and was unable to vote, so the final vote was 50-49, far from the 60 votes needed to pass the bill.

To see how senators voted: CNBC's tableau graphic

As soon as (and before) the government shut down at midnight, many Senators and other politicians began pointing fingers and shifting blame to the opposite party. Senate Democrats claimed that the Republicans were at fault because they controlled both houses of Congress as well as the Presidency. Senate Republicans claimed that the Democrats were at fault because not enough Senate Democrats voted to pass the spending bill (60 votes were needed). Senate Democrats also claimed that Trump had ruined negotiations by changing his mind so often on the bipartisan immigration deal.

Sources:
New York Times
CNBC
CBS News
Reuters
NPR Politics Podcast

Questions:
1. Who do you think is most at fault for the government shutdown?
2. How do you think this shutdown could have been prevented?
3. What do you think are the best next steps from here?

All the goodies that were at CES this year!

 Source

With the impending government shutdown, we’ll have no access to national parks, monuments, or the Smithsonian. But don’t worry: the products announced at CES 2018 will no doubt keep you entertained (I mean, what even is nature, after all?)

Probably one of the most recognizable products at the show was a new version of the HTC Vive VR headset. It’s now wireless, solving the problem of getting tangled up in cords during intense gaming sessions. I personally am still not interested in VR because I think it’s too expensive, but what are your thoughts? How cheap would VR have to be for you to be willing to buy it? Do you think VR is every truly going to become big, or will it stay a niche area for hardcore gamers?

Another cool thing: fingerprint scanners below the display glass of a smartphone. No button needed. Just touch the screen and your phone is unlocked. I predict this will be one of the big features on 2018 smartphones.

What are you most excited about?

All the goodies:

Techradar

Gizmodo

Wired

How the American opiate epidemic was started by one pharmaceutical company

 Source

My original inspiration to cover this topic comes from this incredible New Yorker piece. It’a a 1-1.5 hour read, so I don’t exactly expect you to go through all of it right away, but if you at all have the time, or can split it up over multiple days (like I did) it’s completely worthwhile. For those of you who are less ambitious / more realistic, here’s a similar article that’s much shorter.


The gist of them is that the current opioid crisis is thanks in large part to the unethical practices of Purdue Pharma. Purdue released OxyContin, a synthetic painkiller, in 1995. What made it stand out was that Purdue Pharma begin an aggressive campaign encouraging doctors to prescribe it in large doses.

Although most opioids are prescribed for only short periods of time to prevent addiction, Purdue encourage doctors to use OxyContin to treat chronic pain, claiming that the time release mechanism of it prevented addiction and abuse. There was little research to back this up, and the research that did was often funded by … Purdue.

As people became addicted, Purdue did little to stop it. They kept track of sales volumes, but didn’t bat an eyelash at shady doctors who were prescribing thousands of pills a day.

Tying all this into what we are studying in gov right now, I think that a good amount of criticism should also go to the FDA. Not only did the FDA do little to regulate Purdue’s misleading advertising, but also, without any addiction studies, “approved a package insert for OxyContin which announced that the drug was safer than rival painkillers.”

With that in mind, do you think the FDA should have more stringent regulations on painkillers? Do you think that the government should take action against Purdue? Should a rule be issued that makes Pharma companies more responsible for the negative consequences of their drugs?

Republicans scramble to try to avert government shutdown as deadline nears

House Speaker Paul Ryan (Source)

In an attempt to prevent a government shutdown, House Republican leaders are attempting to pass a stopgap measure on Thursday. It is unclear whether the Republicans will be able to get this to pass on time with Donald Trump's confusing tweets possibly hindering their efforts. In an attempt to gain support from Democrats in the Senate, a sweetener deal to re-authorize CHIPS (Children's Health Insurance Program) for six years was included by House Speaker Paul Ryan. President Trump seemed to be against this idea, tweeting out this statement: "CHIP should be part of a long term solution, not a 30 Day, or short term, extension!". Despite this statement, congressional Republicans later stated that Trump was fully on board with their plan, making this tweet even more confusing. Furthermore, Trump's tweet is inaccurate, as the sweetener deal will extend CHIP for six years rather than the 30 days that Trump mentions. According to Ryan, the tweet was not "causing problems at all" and is confident that the deal will be passed.

As I predicted in my previous post, it looks like the Republicans are doing everything in their power to prevent a shutdown from occurring. With the Republicans being in control of the House, the Senate, and the White House, they will most likely be blamed for the shutdown. Despite the damage that Trump's tweet may cause, I agree with Ryan and think that a deal will successfully be passed. To quote Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, "there's not going to be a government shutdown. It's just not going to happen". If I'm wrong and a shutdown does happen, it will not be good for the Republicans at all.

Source: CNN Source 1 (Includes timeline of past government shutdowns)  Source 2

Senate Democrats Make Hard Left Turn in Warming Up for 2020 Race

Background:
Although the 2020 Presidential election is still over two and half years away, several Democratic senators are already preparing to become the next Democratic Presidential candidate. There are around six senators that are said to be possibly considering Presidential bids: Cory Booker (NJ), Kirsten Gillibrand (NY), Kamala Harris (CA), Amy Klobuchar (MN), Jeff Merkley (OR) and Elizabeth Warren (MA), as well as Democrat-ish Bernie Sanders (VT).

The preparation for the 2020 race has caused many of the senators mentioned above to lean left, with some senators refusing to vote for any bill that doesn't include protections for the people previously protected by DACA. However, many senators running for re-election in 2018 in "Trump states" are nervous about leaning too far left and alienating their base, causing a division between Democrats who would like to avoid government shutdown and Democrats who are willing to let the government shutdown in order to ensure that DACA passes.

Questions:
1. Do you think individual Democratic senators preparing for the 2020 election is severely fracturing Democratic party unity?
2. Should the Democratic senators try to focus more on solving issues that are important in their party instead of the 2020 Presidential election?
3. Do you think any of the possible 2020 Democratic party candidates have a strong chance to win the general election if Trump runs against them?

Sources:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/17/us/politics/democrat-senators-presidential-election-left.html
http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/16/politics/democrats-daca-immigration-politics/index.html
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/if-you-want-to-know-whos-running-in-2020-watch-capitol-hill-not-iowa/

Washington edges closer to a government shutdown

Background context: DACA was an immigration policy set forth by President Obama which allowed individuals who entered the U.S. illegally as minors to be eligible for a work permit as well as a two year period of deferred action from deportation (essentially, they could delay deportation for two years). DACA was rescinded by Trump in September of 2017 with March 5 being the end date for DACA.

Government shutdown seems to be looming on the horizon for Donald Trump and Congress with a compromise for DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) sorely in need. With the end date for DACA quickly approaching, Democrats as well as ex-Homeland Security secretaries are urging Congress to pass a deal on DACA this month so that applications for DACA can begin being processed. However, it seems extremely unlikely that a deal on DACA can be made soon due to the current lack of trust between the opposing sides. Following Trump's comment about "shithole countries" (or "shithouse" depending on who you ask), hope for a deal seems to be at an all time low. This is not the first time that a government shutdown has almost occurred during the Trump administration. A shutdown almost occurred in December of 2017, but was narrowly avoided due to a stopgap bill being passed by Congress to keep the government funded through December into January.

Personally, I do not believe a government shutdown would happen due to the danger it would pose to the Republicans. During and after the government shutdown of 2013, a majority of the public blamed the Republicans for the shutdown. With a midterm election approaching, the Republicans cannot afford to be seen in any sort of negative light, or they would risk losing important seats in Congress to the Democrats.

1. Is Trump's "shithole" comment alone a justifiable reason for the Democrats to refuse compromise, or is it just an excuse to not let Congress get a more favorable deal?

2. Do you think the government will actually shutdown or do you think the two opposing sides will actually compromise? If the government were to shutdown, what do you think the public opinion would be?

Source: NBC (Includes a timeline of the DACA standoff)

Doctor Declares Trump's Health Excellent, With Perfect Score on Cognitive Test

Trump had his first physical examination as President of the United States recently, and the results seem to be relatively normal for both his physical health and mental health. Trump asked the White House Physician, Dr. Ronny L. Jackson, for a short mental health examination last-minute, so Dr. Jackson administered the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, which is a short screening exam. While not extensive, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment mostly clears up any major mental concerns.

Many articles and even books have been published in recent months questioning Trump's mental health, so this mental examination addresses many of these concerns. In addition, people on Twitter often weigh in on their opinion of Trump's mental health, such as when Trump slurred his words during a speech in December (Dr. Jackson concluded that it was due to Trump's medication at the time).

My own opinion is that the debate over Donald Trump's mental health has been exaggerated out of proportion. We should be discussing other issues and allow doctors to clear up these issues rather than making "armchair diagnoses."

Source: New York Times

Questions:
1. Is the Montreal Cognitive Assessment enough to clear up the doubt over Trump's mental health?
2. Do you think that the debate over Trump's mental health is reasonable or has it been exaggerated?

Tesla is about to suffer the same fate as Ford

Source

Here’s the summary straight from the beginning of the article:

• In the 20th century, General Motors out-competed Ford.
• Ford was the early innovator, but GM was able to improve on Ford's achievements to become dominant.
• The same dynamic is now playing out between GM and Tesla, with electric cars and autonomous vehicles.

My own analysis of this economic issue: I think the author presents a fair point. Tesla will maintain its cache as a luxury EV brand, but will never manage to have the mass market appeal of GM. Although Tesla was the first to create a commercially-successful electric car, their advantage of being the first into the market is fading, and other brands are learning from Tesla’s success. I actually hope for this to be true. Tesla simply does not have very high manufacturing capacity and cannot provide electric cars for all those who want them. We need other manufacturers to create attractive products so that everybody has access to good electric cars.

Every manufacturer seems to be more interested in electric cars, but do you think that Americans are interested in buying them?
If you had the money, would you buy an electric car?
If yes, would you want it to be a Tesla, even if it was more expensive?

Oprah Winfrey: from poverty to America's first black billionaire … to #Oprah2020?

We all know Oprah Winfrey as the talk show host. However, there has been recent buzz that she may run for the presidency in 2020. Previously, Oprah has shot down suggestions stating that she "will never run for public office. That's a pretty definite thing." However, she has teased the idea more recently.

People seem to be backing her up and supporting her as well. One Republican strategist who has worked on presidential campaigns said "her chances of winning? 100%. If she runs for the Democratic nomination, I think it's over." Bill Kristol, the original promoter of Sarah Pali tweeted "Oprah. #ImWithHer."

Just a couple of years ago, it would seem somewhat absurd to see a TV star running for the presidency. However, ever since Donald Trump, it does not seem as ridiculous, meaning Oprah has a legitimate chance at running and winning. I think it is interesting how celebrities and TV stars are trying to become involved in politics. Even Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson is considering running for president, and apparently he is "seriously considering a run," or how Kanye West wanted to run for the 2020 presidency as well. As the article states, "have we lost our mind? or are we coming to our senses?" I personally think that, in most cases, people who .have worked mainly in TV are not as qualified as most other politicians to run for the presidency because of their lack of experience and political awareness and knowledge.



What do you think? Do you think Oprah will run and if so, will she be a good candidate? What are your thoughts on the recent surge of TV stars on the political scene like Trump and Oprah?



Sources:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2018/01/08/oprah-for-president-in-2020-heres-everything-you-need-to-know/?
utm_term=.57ada7b54d5dhttps://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/oprah-could-run-oprah-could-win-is-america-going-insane-or-just-coming-to-its-senses/2018/01/08/d116897e-f48c-11e7-b34a-b85626af34ef_story.html?utm_term=.cc4b772b16f9https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2018/jan/12/oprah-winfrey-unlikely-to-run-for-us-president-but-could-win-if-she-did

Melania Trump, America's enigmatic first lady

Melania Trump is unlike many other previous first ladies. She is the first with English as her second language, the first foreign-born wife of a president in almost two centuries, and a former model who once posed nude in President Trump's jet. Many are calling Melania Trump an "enigma -- a first lady whose opinions, marriage and goals remain a mystery to millions of Americans."

So far, Melania Trump has not done anything with her position as first lady and is "infrequently seen in Washington and [is] costing law enforcement tends of thousands of dollars a day in protection." This lack of initiative and cause on her part is in sharp contrast to former first ladies likeMichelle Obama, who was started anti-obesity campaign, or Laura Bush with her literacy program. People close to Melania Trump, however, believes she "intends to announce a signature initiative in the coming months with a focus on the overall well-being of children," which is encouraging news to hear.

Interestingly, a Gallup poll taken in December said that she was viewed favorably by 54% of Americans, which is much more popular than Donald Trump. Why do you think this is? Some are even praising Melania, arguing that it is impressive that "she has not made huge mistakes in this arena."

What do you think? Is Melania Trump doing well as a first lady, and if not what do you think she should try and do?

Sources:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-says-durbin-totally-misrepresented-comments-205340674.html