shadow-music.net

Friday, June 19, 2020

The following is the first edition of a monthly series chronicling the 2020 United States presidential election. It features original material compiled throughout the previous month after an overview of the month’s biggest stories.

This month’s spotlight on the campaign trail includes interviews with the vice presidential nominees of the Constitution and Libertarian parties as well as the chosen running mate of the leading Green Party presidential candidate.

Friday, April 30, 2021

On Tuesday, the Governor of the US state of Arizona Doug Ducey signed into law a bill banning abortion if sought solely because of a foetus’ genetic abnormality.

Senate Bill 1457, which stalled twice for criticism by opponents of abortion, passed both chambers of the Republican-controlled Arizona Legislature last week in a party-line vote, amended twice along the way to alleviate concerns by two hesitant Republicans.

The bill makes it a Class 6 felony, the least severe, to seek or perform an abortion “because of a genetic abnormality of the child”, defined as “the presence or presumed presence of an abnormal gene expression in an unborn child”, but not a “severe fetal abnormality” considered “incompatible with life.” Intimidating someone to get an abortion and soliciting or accepting monies to finance an abortion for this purpose has been made a Class 3 felony.

The bill also allows the unborn child’s father or, in case the mother is under 18, a maternal grandparent to sue, as well as including the applicability of state law to “an unborn child at every stage of development”, which Senator Kirsten Engel and Representative Melody Hernandez wrote in a submitted minority report “would open up the potential for prosecutors to charge persons including the pregnant individual whose conduct results in a woman having a miscarriage with murder, manslaughter or child endangerment.”

Other provisions of the bill includes a prohibition on the distribution “via courier, delivery or mail service” of abortion-inducing drugs, a ban on any public educational institution from performing or aiding non-life saving abortion, a ban on the use of public or tax monies paid by the state or students for university research involving foetal remains or somatic cell nuclear transfer, or any state money towards organisations providing abortion care, and requiring all foetal remains to be buried or cremated.

KYMA-DT reported Ducey is an anti-abortion rights governor who ran on the Republican ballot and has never vetoed anti-abortion legislation. In a statement, Duckey said, “[t]here’s immeasurable value in every single life — regardless of genetic makeup […] We will continue to prioritize protecting life in our preborn children, and this legislation goes a long way in protecting real human lives.” The news release, originally published on his website also read, “[w]ith this legislation, Arizona remains among the top pro-life states in the nation.”

Senator Nancy Barto said, according to the release “[w]e need to protect our most vulnerable, especially those with treatable genetic conditions […] They are loved, integral members of our community that make Arizona whole”. Cathi Herrod, president of Center for Arizona Policy said in her own news release, according to the Associated Press “[t]oday, Arizonans win.”

Representative Diego Espinoza wrote in a tweet, “I’m disappointed to see Arizona moving in this direction, ignoring the needs and desires of doctors, women, and families for an extreme political agenda.” Representative and House Democratic Leader Reginald Bolding wrote in a statement “it’s disturbing and wrong that the legislature is not focusing on policies to help [women], and instead is stripping away the fundamental freedom to choose if, when, and how to start or grow a family.”

In a letter shared to a Facebook post, the union United Campus Workers at Arizona State University urged last Saturday to the Arizona Board of Regents, university president Michael M. Crow and University of Arizona president Robert D. Robbins to “immediately speak out against SB 1457”, calling it “a blatant attack on reproductive freedom”.

Friday, May 12, 2006

Peter Costello’s budget announcement has led to rejoicing for small businesses, but the lack of joy for those pushing for radical corporate taxation reform has led to many businesses asking “what about us?”

Personal taxation and small business have been the big winners after this year’s federal budget. Although dampened by the twin economic threats of rising interest rates and petrol prices, there should be a reasonable amount of real income savings for both low and high income earners, with those receiving Medicare, or a superannuation benefit, privy to an even lower level of taxation (0% for those on super benefits).

Small business also has benefited from the Howard government’s 11th annual budget, with them receiving a higher level of reducing depreciation, leading to a higher level of deductions in the years following the uptake of new technology or other capital. They are also privy to a AU$435 million dollar tax cut to compensate for their changing accounting requirements under the government’s new AIFRS reporting standards, as well as increasing the uptake of both the small business tax relief scheme and CGT (Capital Gains tax) Concessions.

The budget was not a complete loss for big business however, as superannuation laws have been tweaked to streamline contribution and payment rules previously impeding those with multitudes of staff.

But this is not enough, says Big 4 accounting firm Ernst & Young. In their newly published paper “Taxation of Investment in Australia: the need for ongoing reform”. In it they lead the charge for a greater streamlining and organization of the corporate tax system in Australia, submitting that it will lead to reductions in “disincentives to work save and invest in Australia [as well as improving] the international competitiveness of Australian businesses.” This follows from a recent report brought out by Mr. Costello himself about the need for tax reform in Australia.

A budget night Mr. Costello was notably coy about any future reform of corporate tax in Australia. He alluded to the report by his ministers but kept from outlining the government’s plan precisely.

Friday, September 9, 2005

New Orleans, Louisiana —After Category 4 storm Hurricane Katrina slammed into New Orleans, on the night before August 29, 2005, several flood control constructions failed. Much of the city flooded through the openings. One of these was the flood wall forming one side of the 17th Street Canal, near Lake Pontchartrain. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is the primary agency for engineering support during such emergencies. A USACE team was assessing the situation in New Orleans on the 29th, water flow was stopped September 2nd, and the breach was closed on September 5th.

Tuesday, March 17, 2009

“In the Name of the Grandfather“, the fourteenth episode of the twentieth season of the American animated television series The Simpsons will today become the first episode of the show to premiere in Europe. It will air at 7:30 PM on Sky1 in the United Kingdom and Ireland and be paired with “Sex, Pies and Idiot Scrapes“. The special broadcast is part of FOX’s year-long “Best. 20 Years. Ever.” celebration which commemorates the 20th anniversary of the show. To promote the broadcast, executive producers Al Jean and James L. Brooks, as well as Nancy Cartwright visited Ireland and are scheduled to participate in the Saint Patrick’s Day parade in Dublin. The episode was screened at the Lighthouse Cinema in Dublin on March 16. The American debut of the episode will be March 22, 2009.

In the episode, the Simpson family travels to Ireland so Grampa can visit a pub where he once had the best night of his life. Guest stars scheduled for the episode include Colm Meaney as Tom O’Flanagan, Kathy Ireland as herself, Glen Hansard as a street musician and Markéta Irglová as an Eastern European woman.

Executive producer Al Jean stated the episode is intended to be “an affectionate love letter to Ireland” because many of the writers have Irish roots. The episode will feature Irish landmarks including Giant’s Causeway, the Blarney Castle and the Guinness Brewery.

Previous episodes of the show where the Simpson family visits other countries have been controversial. For example, the Simpsons visited Australia in “Bart vs. Australia” and Brazil in “Blame it on Lisa“, and both episodes generated controversy and negative reaction in the visited countries.

The Rio de Janeiro tourist board claimed that the city was portrayed as having rampant street crime, kidnappings, slums, and monkey and rat infestations; and threatened FOX with legal action. When asked whether he thought this episode would generate similar controversies, Al Jean replied “I’m Irish American and I know Irish people have an excellent sense of humor so we weren’t very worried.”

Friday, March 10, 2006

Buffalo, New York —The Common Council of Buffalo voted on Tuesday to send the Elmwood Village Hotel proposal “to committee for further discussion”, after citing the need for more public involvement.

The Elmwood Village Hotel is a development proposal by the Savarino Construction Services Corporation, a project designed by the architect Karl Frizlen of The Frizlen Group. The hotel would be placed on the southeast corner of Elmwood and Forest Avenues in Buffalo.

To make way for the project, at least five buildings located at 1109 to 1121 Elmwood Ave would be demolished. At least two properties on Forest Avenue could also be demolished. The Elmwood properties, according to Eva Hassett, Vice President of Savarion Construction, are “under contract”, but it is unclear if Savarino Construction actually owns the Elmwood properties. Hans Mobius, a former mayorial candidate, is still believed to be the current owner the properties. Mobius also owns 607 Forest Avenue.

The properties 605 and 607 Forest Avenue could also be included in the proposal according to Hassett.

“We would use a Special Development Plan to rezone 1119-1121 Elmwood and 605 Forest to a C-2 zoning category,” stated Hassett. It is possible that Savarino Construction may try to obtain a variance for 605 Forest, which would allow them to enforce eminent domain, should the hotel be allowed to go forward.

The building at 607 Forest was also discussed to be rezoned, but it is unclear what the plans would be for that property. During the February 28 Common Council meeting, Hassett stated that the properties 605 and 607 were “now off the agenda”.

Pano Georgiadis, owner of Pano’s Restaurant at 1081 Elmwood, owns the property at 605 Forest and attended Tuesday’s Common Council meeting.

“Having a hotel is a bright idea. We all love the idea of a hotel, but the way that it is presented, is wishful thinking. This hotel does not fit. It’s like putting two gallons of water in a gallon jug, it does not fit. At the last meeting, the architect admitted that they are planning to put the undergound parking lot and the hotel, right at the property line. If I open my window, I will be able to touch the wall, that goes fifty feet high”, said Georgiadis.

“There is a problem having a seventy-two room hotel and fifty-five parking spaces. That means that all the other cars will spill all over the neighborhood. The footprint is simply too small. If you have a bigger [parking] lot, and a smaller hotel, I will welcome a hotel. I have a parking lot at my own business, and I am chasing people all day long. Remember, the city says it has ‘zero tolerance [for illegal parking]’. Try telling that to the guy from Albany who came to see his kids, that are going to Buffalo State, who would get tickets totaling over a hundred dollars”, added Georgiadis.

The city’s Planning Board is scheduled to meet on March 14, 2006 at 9:00 a.m. about the proposal. Although a discussion will take place, no vote is expected to be taken.

At the moment, none of the properties are zoned for a hotel. Savarino Construction plans on asking for a C2 zoning permit. If that does not work, they plan to implement a new zoning plan called a “special development plan” which would allow for only a hotel on the site. That zone would not be able to be changed.

“This [project] justifies Mobius’s refusal to invest in any maitenance^[sic] or improvements”, on the properties said Clarence Carnahan, a local resident. “Where were the Council persons over the years? Where were the city inspectors over the years, to make sure that he maintained and improved his properties? The government was supposed to be protecting, not being preditorial. I see a predatorial issue here when it comes to this hotel. Over the years: Why has the local government been disfunctional when it came to Mobius’s properties? Refusal to invest in improvements, doesn’t that sound like a slumlord? Maybe I am missing a point here, but what kind of messages does this send to other slumlords that havn’t^[sic] been jailed or fined? It’s [the hotel] trying to be pushed through.”

Carnahan also presented signs for residents and or business owners who are opposed to the hotel, that could be placed in windows or on stakes in the yard. Some of the signs said, ‘No tell hotel’, ‘Hans off, no hotel’, ‘It takes more than a hotel to make a village’. and ‘Keep Elmwood free, no hotel’. Carnahan plans on making more signs for a protest to be held on Saturday March 18, at 2:00 p.m. (EST) on Elmwood and Forest. Some signs were given to individuals after the meeting.

“First things first, Hans is the problem, and I don’t think it has been addressed. Let’s roll back the clock on this project. What can we do with Hans? There is such thing as eminent domain, which could be of greater interest to the community, to seize the property at its lowest assessed value”, said Nancy Pollina, co-owner of Don Apparel with Patty Morris at 1119 Elmwood. “There are so many ideas that have not been explored and we are about to give this parcel away, to a big developer.”

Mobius has not returned any calls by Wikinews regarding the situation.

A freelance journalist writing for Wikinews has obtained a letter, exclusively, addressed to one of the five business owners from Hans Mobius stating:

There is a proposal to develop my property which you are currently renting. Because of opposition to this development, it does not look like it will happen. I will let you know if there any changes.

Despite the letter, there have been no plans or decisions made to end the proposal.

To date, none of the business owners or residents of 1119-1121 Elmwood have received an eviction notice.

Business owners and residents gave an indication of what they would like to see happen at the corner; a project similar to one done locally last year. There, developers renovated two buildings on Auburn and Elmwood Avenues, merging the buildings into one thus allowing for more shop space. Among some of the shops to move in after the development were Cone Five Pottery, The Ruby Slipper, and Abraham’s Jewelers. Prior to the renovation work, the left building in the picture was boarded up for several years. Many of the concerned locals would like to see a similar development on Forest and Elmwood.

Rocco Termini, a developer in Buffalo, proposed a similar design at the February 28 community meeting

In an interview after the February 28 meeting, Termini stated, “I will be willing to take a look at this myself, or I would be more than happy to be partners with Sam, Sam Savarino”, who is President and Chief Executive Officer of Savarino Construction Services Corp.

So far Savarino Construction has no plans to team up with Termini.

[edit]