Staff Writer

What will a $300 child benefit in the US equalize to?

What will a $300 child benefit in the US equalize to?

The United States in Biden’s presidency is planning something that has never been done in America – providing child benefit of $300. This will prove to offer a considerable seismic shift in the US that has one of the highest rates of child poverty in developed countries.

In a stimulus of up to $300 per child per month, the Democrats are planning to include this under the larger coronavirus spending package. Biden’s spokesperson has relayed that though current plans are to concentrate on ‘emergency’ funding and not on a permanent directional shift, anti-poverty advocates argue that a program of offering monthly child benefit will work towards more lasting change in demolishing poverty in the country. Michelle Dallafior of First Focus on Children said, “Child poverty in this country has been persistently high and once we get a program into place and iron out those wrinkles, then we’re going to keep pushing to make sure that it is permanent.” 

He added, “It is an emergency and not a temporary one.”

Child benefit is offered in most of the countries, including the UK and Canada for decades together now. US has its fears that such ‘social welfare programmes’ would discourage people from working, and that these would rely chiefly on annual tax credit. In US, the programme that was introduced in 1997, currently equates to $2000 per child. But how much a family gets per child depends on how much it makes, and thus owes tax. This complex design leaves the children and families who need this benefit the most. The group that do not receive full benefit comprise of poor, black and Hispanic predominantly. 

What’s the Democratic plan & what would the changes do?

Under Democratic plan, tax credit would enable families to receive up to $3,600 per child per year under 6 years and for up to 18 years age $3000. The benefits would be computed monthly and would be provided to no and low income families, further extending to single parent households that earn over $75,000 and for couples earning over $150,000. 

Related Posts

  1. dbbc5777b81de420ddb10156ca8f431b11 150x150 - What will a $300 child benefit in the US equalize to?
  2. US Poor 150x150 - What will a $300 child benefit in the US equalize to?
  3. 39373292 9266809 image a 2 161351518126311 150x150 - What will a $300 child benefit in the US equalize to?

This plan will potentially reduce poverty among children and improve their quality of life. This will also benefit families and improve country’s birth rate that has been declining rapidly, as envisioned by Senator Mitt Romney who proposes monthly allowance per child.  

Switzerland asks for a seat on the United Nations Security Council, how has Swiss neutrality changed?

Switzerland asks for a seat on the United Nations Security Council, how has Swiss neutrality changed?

Switzerland is applying for a seat as a non-permanent member of the United Nations Security Council. The elections for membership in the period 2023/2024 will take place in June 2022. With a virtual event held in New York, to which the President of the Confederation, Simonetta Sommaruga, and Federal Councillor Ignazio Cassis participated with a speech each, the candidacy is entering the final stage.

Switzerland officially presented its candidacy for the UN Security Council as early as 2011. After the election of its direct predecessor within the Western European and Others Group (WEOG) regional group for the period 2021/2022, it is now starting for Switzerland, the final phase of the candidacy. Which, with the slogan “A Plus for Peace”, was virtually presented to representatives of all UN missions on the evening of 29 October in New York. On Friday 30 Oct., the President of the Confederation and Federal Councillor Cassis informed the media in Bern about the event and the state of implementation of the candidacy. A seat on the Security Council will enable Switzerland to commit itself to its foreign policy objectives and to demonstrate its capabilities for peace and security.

President Sommaruga and Federal Councillor Cassis originally planned a trip to New York. Due to the restrictive measures on entry due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the event took place exclusively in a virtual manner. In her video speech, the President of the Confederation highlighted the strengths of the Swiss political system. “We are looking for consensual solutions both in our domestic and foreign policy. The only way to create consensus is dialogue.” Cassis underlined, highlighting the positive contribution that Switzerland would like to make to the Security Council. “We have a reputation for being reliable partners with a long tradition of promoting peace.” He added, also reiterating Switzerland’s commitment to the rule of law, democracy, peace, and security. When it comes to running for important UN bodies, it is customary for candidate states to present themselves appropriately to the electoral body.

Who would have thought that the highly reserved Switzerland, which entered the United Nations only in 2002, thanks to a referendum in which a little more than half of the voters agreed, had in the meantime gained such momentum as to demand a seat in the UN Security Council? The non-permanent seat coveted by Bern is one of the two vacating for the two years 2023-2024, and the Swiss government is exercising discrete lobbying to win it. However, this ambition for observers would clash with Swiss neutrality. 

The United Nations Security Council has to take positions in the ongoing conflicts. For a State being neutral means keeping out of armed conflict. Swiss neutrality dates back de facto to 1516, when one year after the battle of Marignano, the last armed conflict fought by the troops of the Confederation of the XIII and, which ended with a bitter defeat by the French army. Switzerland signed with king Francis I of France a peace treaty destined to make a school. Considered posterior as the birth certificate of Swiss neutrality, this treaty provided, among other things, for a court of arbitrators chosen by both parties to settle any future disputes. Thanks to this pact, Switzerland managed to keep a low profile in foreign policy for over two centuries. Only in 1798, with the country’s occupation by the French army, the old Confederation was forced to temporarily abandon its neutrality.

Officially, Swiss neutrality was recognized for the first time by the great European powers in the Treaty of Paris of November 20, 1815. On that occasion, Austria, Great Britain, Portugal, Prussia, and Russia undertook to respect Switzerland’s will not to interfere in future military operations and, at the same time, guaranteed territorial inviolability. Neutrality is a principle of international law. The rights and obligations, linked to a neutral country status, first written codification dates back to the 1907 Hague Conventions. Among the obligations, in addition to non-belligerence during a conflict and self-defense, also among the rights stands the inviolability of its territory. Neutrality is not one of the aims of the state in the Swiss Constitution but is mentioned in the list of duties of the National Assembly.

Throughout history, Swiss neutrality has taken on different forms and connotations. Faced with international conflicts, the Confederation cannot avoid questioning itself on the behavior to adopt and on the meaning to attribute from time to time to the concept of active and armed neutrality. At the end of the First World War, Switzerland joined the League of Nations and was also willing to adopt economic sanctions.

When the Second World War then broke out, to consolidate its neutrality, the country decreed the general mobilization of the army, thus sending a strong and clear signal to the potential aggressors who, in the event of an attack, would defend the own territory.

Is the vaccine passport really a good idea for Europe? Experts raise doubts

Is the vaccine passport really a good idea for Europe? Experts raise doubts

In Europe, the idea of ​​granting benefits to travelers who have been vaccinated is gaining ground. However, the idea of ​​a European vaccination passport seems at least premature, if not downright reckless, at this stage of the pandemic. Initially proposed by the Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis and welcomed by political leaders of other countries with a significant tourist economy, the vaccine passport should serve in the coming months to overcome the limitations of travel within the Union. The president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, welcomed it as a medical requirement necessary to keep borders open.

As Alberto Alemanno chair of European Union Law at the Grande École des Hautes Etudes Commercials (HEC) in Paris, and Luiza Bialasiewicz chair of European Governance at the University of Amsterdam, write in an editorial published on the Italian “La Repubblica,” the adoption of this measure, risks having a series of unintended consequences. Because it is based on wrong premises from a legal, scientific, and territorial point of view. Also, instead of uniting Europe by reducing travel restrictions, the vaccine passport would simply create new frontiers between people registered as safe and those who are not safe.

Experts point out that, in the first place, the certificate bases on the assumption that those who will be allowed to travel are no longer carriers of the virus. The data currently in our possession suggest that vaccines for Covid-19 block the manifestation of symptoms but, as regards the transmission of the virus, only slow it down. So, the scientific premise behind the passport seems at least questionable.

But it is not only the erroneous scientific premises that cast doubts on the proposal aimed at introducing a pan-European vaccination document. The prerequisite for making freedom of movement within the Union conditional on vaccination should be equal access to the vaccine. At the moment, the strong differences in the course of the vaccination campaign among EU Member States make the probability of being vaccinated for the citizens of some countries much higher than in others. The Danes would be much freer to move than the French.

Related Posts

  1. Blue Coronavirus11 150x150 - Is the vaccine passport really a good idea for Europe? Experts raise doubts
  2. GettyImages 1230049856 1024x57611 1 150x150 - Is the vaccine passport really a good idea for Europe? Experts raise doubts

The Germans would be many months before the Dutch. There are also significant geographical differences within member countries, where those who live outside large urban areas are less likely to access the vaccine, while the ability of individual regions to organize the first phase of administration is highly variable.

In addition to these differences, depending on the residence country or region, individual Member States are free to choose the people’s categories to be vaccinated as precedence. Apart from the rightly given priority to the categories most at risk, such as medical personnel and the elderly, each Member State is free to choose the next groups of “essential” individuals who will receive the vaccine: teachers, transport workers, journalists, and so on. In short, the people defined as “essential” or “on the front line” in each EU country do not necessarily correspond to the same groups of people.

The US Senate will begin the impeachment trial against the former President Donald Trump

The US Senate will begin the impeachment trial against the former President Donald Trump

The United States Senate will begin the impeachment trial against former President Donald Trump the week of February, 8. Majority leader Chuck Schumer announced yesterday in the Senate chamber. The senator confirmed the timing of the Chamber proceeding, specifying that on Monday, Jan. 25, the Chamber will deliver the documents to the Senate. The day after, all the formal documents will be held, with the hearing starts.

The decision is the result of a compromise between Democrat Schumer and Republican leader Mitch McConnell, as they asked for a postponement of the trial in mid-February to allow Trump to prepare his defense. In the meantime, the Senate will be able to continue its hearings to confirm the ministers appointed by the new president Joe Biden and to discuss the new aid package for the coronavirus pandemic in the United States.

Trump and a Justice Department lawyer have come up with a plan to oust Jeffrey Rosen, acting attorney general after William Barr’s resignation, and use the ministry power to force Georgia lawmakers to overturn the election outcome. presidential elections in that state. That was revealed by the New York Times, citing four former administration executives who asked for anonymity.

The attorney in question, Jeffrey Clark, had let the president know that he shared his allegations of fraud and was ready to go along with Rosen’s denied requests for investigations. But department executives had unanimously threatened on a conference call that they would resign if Rosen was fired. Only this consequence, according to the NYT, would have kept Trump from the tear, calculating that the controversy over the mass resignation at the top of the ministry would have eclipsed attention to his baseless accusations of fraudulent elections.

Previously, the Washington Post published a tape of a call, in which Donald Trump pressures Georgia’s secretary of state to overturn the election result. During the audio recording, which the newspaper aired on its website, Trump asked Georgia’s secretary of state to find about 11,779 votes to close the gap with Biden and reverse the result. According to the newspaper, Trump warned Georgia’s secretary of state of the criminal consequences if he did not respond to his allegations of fraud in the state elections, adding that this “anomalous call” lasted an hour.

For the Washington Post, which published excerpts of the call on its website, Trump used several methods to address Georgia Secretary of State Brad Ravensburger – a Republican like him – ranging from flattery and pleading, and between reproach and threat of unclear legal consequences if he refused. Throughout the call, Ravensburger and his chief legal counsel rejected Trump’s insistence on vote-counting fraud and clarified that he was relying on unfounded conspiracy theories and that President-elect Joe Biden’s victory in the status of 11,779 votes was fair and accurate.

In a one-day lightning process, the US House passed the impeachment motion against Donald Trump to incite insurgency for encouraging his fans to storm Congress and prevent Joe Biden’s victory certification. In addition to all the Democrats, 10 Republicans also voted in favor: the game now moves to the Senate.

Coronavirus, Europe introduces “red zones” and new restrictions to limit non-essential travel within the Union

Coronavirus, Europe introduces “red zones” and new restrictions to limit non-essential travel within the Union

New restrictive measures to limit non-essential travel within the Union. Introduction of mandatory tests on departure and quarantine on arrival for those traveling from high-risk areas identified with a new color, dark red. These are the choices made late in the evening by the heads of state and government at the end of their ninth video summit dedicated to Covid. A meeting convened by the President of the European Council, Charles Michel, to counter the spread of the new variants of the virus, explained Ursula von der Leyen, “worry us a lot: the situation is serious.”

A few minutes after the start of the EU summit, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (ECDC) indicated an increase in infections is expected with the variants. That can lead to an increasing number of hospitalizations and deaths in all age groups, especially the older ones. There is also a fear that some mutations could damage the vaccine. Also, for this reason, the EU leaders decided to accelerate the immunization process and to increase the genomic sequencing capacity of tests to monitor strains.

In this context, it is not surprising that new generalized lockdowns have been speculated during the summit. “We must maintain or strengthen the restrictive measures,” said Michel. To avoid a harmful shattering of Schengen, the leaders have pledged to keep internal borders open but they have decided to discourage non-essential travel: those for work and the movement of goods will remain possible. Europeans are also preparing to further secure the Union’s external borders. The Netherlands has already closed flights from 17 non-EU countries, such as the United Kingdom and South Africa.

At the push of Merkel and Macron, the leaders have introduced dark red areas in the virus map from which swab and quarantine will be mandatory. The green light for the mutual recognition of rapid tests between European partners has arrived, a prerequisite for any general medical checkpoints at internal borders. The hypothesis of vaccine passports to circulate skipping the checks is premature, supported by the southern countries with a tourist vocation and rejected by the Nordic for legal, scientific, and political. For now, Europe thinks to adopt a vaccination certificate for medical purposes only, which, however, in the future, perhaps in the summer, could be transformed into a travel document.

In the evening, France announced that starting from Sunday at midnight all travelers arriving from other European Union countries must have the certificate of a negative molecular swab carried out 72 hours before the arrival in the country. The tampon will be mandatory for all non-essential journeys. Cross-border workers and land transport workers remain exempt from the obligation.

US-Mexico wall, pink swing to fly over.  The idea won the prestigious Design of the Year award

US-Mexico wall, pink swing to fly over. The idea won the prestigious Design of the Year award

A dozen pink swings. Simple but sturdy, in iron. The central pole crosses the border barrier and the seats that rise and fall on one side and the other. The children, happy, playing, and who can look at each other, albeit between the poles that reinforce the wall. It is the work that won the prestigious Design of the Year award among the 74 candidates chosen by the Museum of Design in London for the 13th exhibition, in 2020. The Teeter Totter Wall, during a symbolic 40-minute session, crossed the Wall that divides El Paso in Texas and Ciudad Juárez in Mexico.

It was built by Ronald Rael, professor of Architecture at the University of Berkeley in California, and Virginia San Fratelli, an associate of Design at San José State University. The idea arrived about ten years ago, after the passing of the law in the US, providing the construction of a barrier along the 3,145 kilometers that divides the two North American countries. “It has become increasingly clear, after the latest events in the US, that we do not need to build walls but bridges.” The professor explained. In the video that presented the swings, it is said that they are symbolically important because they show how things can be done.

Other videos had always been shot on the theme in 2019 and had been enormously successful enough to become viral on the social networks. The bright pink is not accidental. The drama of femicide, a real plague on Ciudad Juárez, inspires it. Hundreds of women died, and their bodies were found in the desert surrounding the northern Mexican city. A slaughter effectively described by Sergio Gonzáles Rodriguez in his “Bones in the Desert.” Most of the victims were girls employed in the fabric factories in Ciudad Juárez. Kidnapped, raped, and then killed by assassins on the orders of the city masters.

The two artists wanted to remember that the US-Mexico wall is a legacy that Trump leaves us. Without forgetting, however, that both George W. Bush and Barack Obama did not hesitate to build part of the barrier and to deport hundreds of irregular immigrants. “Trump spoke of the barrier and announced that he would raise it, posing as the man who saved America from invasions. But in reality, he continued the work of the others who had preceded him. Obama and Bush already built it for two thirds.”

 The selection for the award was very tough. Swings prevailed over the competitors, including a 3-D reconstruction of the Coronavirus, a Lee Han Jun set design on the Film Parasite, 4 Oscars in 2020, and a stab-proof vest made from the Union flag worn by British rapper Stormzy at Glastonbury in 2019.

Effects of climate change. Experts warn: “glaciers are disappearing”

Effects of climate change. Experts warn: “glaciers are disappearing”

Climate change is at the top of the concerns of young people around the world. The effects of terrestrial warming are there for all to see, and in a few decades, the world may no longer be as we know it. New forms of life are born, until a few decades ago, the Pico Humboldt glacier was present, at an altitude of 4940 meters, in Venezuela. The Pico Humboldt glacier in the Sierra Nevada National Park is the last in Venezuela. The climate crisis has accelerated its melting, which has become increasingly rapid over the last decade. For the total disappearance of the glacier, it is now a matter of a few years. Meanwhile, a new biodiversity colonizes the bare rocks. A new research by the Institute of Environmental and Ecological Sciences of the University of the Andes (Ula) has confirmed, documenting the dramatic impact of climate change on Andean glaciers.

Downstream of the Pico Humboldt is Mérida: they called it the city of eternal snow. Overlooking the Andes mountain range, the urban center is now the guardian of the little that remains of the Venezuelan glacier. The snow-capped peaks of the mountains formed its unique landscape. It was the only city from which people could see snow in the whole country. Now the ice remains only on the Humboldt summit, and it still resists thanks to its position on the mountain, protected by an inlet. But a new biodiversity takes the opportunity to colonize the unnaturally exposed lands. The researchers collected images and samples of the Venezuelan glacier between 2019 and 2020 and noted that it retreated at an unusual and alarming rate. From 1910, the year of its first measurement, before the Pico Humboldt ascended its height the following year, the glacier would have lost 99% of its mass.

According to the Institute of Environmental and Ecological Sciences of the University of the Andes, in 2019, the area covered by the glacier was just equivalent to five football fields, or 4.5 hectares, vs the 300 hectares in 1910. Since the beginning of the twentieth century, with the rise in temperatures, glaciers worldwide have been affected by global warming. And the tropical Andes are one of the most vulnerable regions. Almost 10 billion tons of perennial snow from glaciers around the world was lost from 1961 to 2016, with an increasing rate in recent years, according to research by United Space in Europe (ESA). Furthermore, after Greenland and Antarctica, the glaciers of Latin America are the ones that contribute most to the rise of the seas and are even more at risk due to pressure from the mining lobbies, as in Chile.

Researchers question the future not only of the Antarctic ecosystem but also of metropolises such as London, Mumbai, New York, Shanghai as we know them. This scenario is feared by a study conducted by the Research Institute on Climate Impacts of Potsdam, together with the University of Potsdam, Columbia University in New York, and the University of Stockholm. More than half of the planet’s freshwater reserves are guarded by the Antarctic ice sheet, which is about five kilometers thick, Ricarda Winkelmann, co-author of the research, explains in a note released by the Potsdam Research Institute on Climate Impacts.

Greenhouse gas emissions from human activities are causing an increase in the temperatures of the atmosphere and ocean waters. The ice covering the South Pole loses mass and becomes less stable. That causes the sea level of the entire planet to rise.

Donald Trump’s last day in the White House, the day of forgiveness

Donald Trump’s last day in the White House, the day of forgiveness

Trump’s last day is the day of forgiveness. The United States outgoing president will sign at least one hundred clemency acts between one box and another. Donald Trump is in the White House for another 24 hours. A shower of indulgences granted precisely by those who have also dusted off the death penalty, sending 13 convicts to death in six months.

With his daughter Ivanka and son-in-law Jared Kushner’s help, Mr president completed the beneficiaries list Sunday. To enjoy the pardons and commutations of sentences will be largely lobbyists, political allies, and the famous rapper Lil Wayne. He risks ten years for illegal weapons possession. Together with many responsible for financial crimes: such as the well-known eye doctor of Palm Beach Salomon Melgen.

The name of Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks, would have been purged. While there may have ended up last minute, the names of Rudy Giuliani and that of his friend Steve Bannon, accused of stealing funds for the construction of the wall on the border with Mexico, were among the firsts. We still do not know if the name of Trump and his children will also be on the list. The councillors have repeatedly advised him against forgiving himself and his family: the act, with uncertain legal boundaries, would be equivalent to admitting to having committed crimes. Capitol Hill attackers shouldn’t be on the list either.

Granting pardon is a constitutional power of the president, widely used in the past as well. Franklin Delano Roosevelt, for example, granted a whopping 2,819 and commuted 418 sentences. Also, Barack Obama – who on his penultimate day pardoned Chelsea Manning, sentenced to 35 years for having passed confidential documents to WikiLeaks – in 8 years, he queued 212: commuting 1715 sentences. But Obama and the other presidents before him have always tried to use that power to correct judicial or health errors. While the 68 graces granted by Trump in these four years mainly concern friends and political allies: from the anti-immigrant sheriff of Arizona Joe Arpaio to the tax evader Charles Kushner.

To get to the recent pardons granted in December to former general Michael Flynn, former councillor Roger Stone and former manager of the first election campaign Paul Manafort, all involved in Russiagate. Unlike his predecessors, Trump nevertheless never used the institutional channel of the Department of Justice.

The requests for pardon have always gone through his trusted men: his son-in-law Jared, the chief of staff Mark Meadows, and the legal adviser Pat Cipollone. The system, denounces the New York Times, has led to a real market for indulgences. Shameless collaborators such as former prosecutor Brett Tolman and attorney John M. Dowd have taken advantage of it. They can get paid thousands of US dollars to get the instances on the president’s table in the White House. A system that would have determined, in the last few weeks only, the acceptance of 41 requests for forgiveness, literally paid in gold.

Facebook, step back on WhatsApp privacy after user leak. New rules postponed by 3 months

Facebook, step back on WhatsApp privacy after user leak. New rules postponed by 3 months

WhatsApp privacy: Mark Zuckerberg rethinks its last decision. On February 8, there will be no update to the WhatsApp privacy policy that will make the accounts of those who do not accept unusable. The forced sharing of some data with Facebook, which has raised a cloud of controversy worldwide, has been postponed for three months. In a matter of days, rival messaging apps like Telegram and Signal experienced a download boom. Although analysts believe that in key ones WhatsApp is so ingrained that its opponents can’t overthrow it, today, Facebook is in danger of losing ground in some markets

Step back of Mark Zuckerberg’s colossus on the new privacy rules of WhatsApp, which would have forced hundreds of millions of users outside Europe to share their data with the social network Facebook. The news caused the real escape of users attentive to personal privacy to other applications such as Signal, also following endorsements such as that of Elon Musk. And so, everything was postponed to May 15, the date on which you will be asked to review and accept the terms. The decision, the company explains, is linked to the “confusion” that has been created, also because “the latest update does not change anything” of the fundamental concept of the company.

“We are aware that our recent update has created a bit of confusion,” the company wrote. “Since the circulation of incorrect and untruthful information has caused concern, we want to clarify and make sure everyone understands the principles we rely on,” he adds. The application, writes WhatsApp, is based on a simple concept: everything you share with family and friends stays with you. “This means we will continue to protect your conversations with end-to-end encryption.” Affirmed the note. The new business options, adds the messaging service, are “optional” and allow users to exchange messages with companies that use WhatsApp.

WhatsApp is the most used messaging app for chatting. But many have also decided to try Signal, an application that allows you to communicate on iOS and Android. And which, for many, would be the safest app in the industry. Signal managed, in a short time, to sneak between Zuckerberg’s mobile application and Telegram, the other chat alternative to WhatsApp. Signal has several features that WhatsApp lacks: the two apps can coexist within our smartphones thanks to their particular peculiarities.

The apps, both available for iOS and Android systems and in the desktop web version, are similar but have features that allow you to distinguish one or the other in everyday use. Both Signal and WhatsApp can count on an intuitive interface. It doesn’t take much to understand how they work. You can make voice and video calls, create groups, and so on. With WhatsApp, it is possible to create group chats up to 256 users while on Signal we have a maximum of 1,000 users.

With Signal within the groups, it is not possible to see if one of our contacts has viewed a message or to check if he is online while on WhatsApp it is. Signal can count on many animated stickers, while on WhatsApp they have recently been introduced, and the functionality and use are limited. Signal also has an app for iPad and tablets, while WhatsApp does not. Signal can count on timed messages that self-destruct according to an indicated time limit. WhatsApp has recently introduced this function but indicating automatic deletion after seven days.

Since it arrived in the digital stores, Signal has distinguished itself for an important element: putting the users’ safety and privacy first. Before others, it introduced end-to-end encryption, the same available for some years also on WhatsApp. And it allows you to use an option that changes the keyboard in incognito mode, preventing the words used in the chats from being saved from the history of the smartphone or from the application itself.

Of course, WhatsApp has a large pool of users built over the years. Today everyone uses the app to text, and it is easier to get in touch with users via WhatsApp than via Signal, although the recent download boom could unbalance this element. The monopoly on Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp is a reality that has been consolidating over the last few years. But this increasingly worries the users interested in knowing how this affects the processing of their data.

After bankruptcy, the powerful US arms lobby risks of disappearing

After bankruptcy, the powerful US arms lobby risks of disappearing

US arms lobby: The NRA, the biggest association of US arms owners with about 5 million members, has announced the initiation of the voluntary bankruptcy procedure aimed at a reorganization. The powerful lobby also explained that it will be absorbed by a non-profit NGO in Texas and leave the New York State one, where it was founded in 1871, to which it was affiliated. A turning point that comes on the eve of the inauguration of the new president, Joe Biden, who unlike Donald Trump, has made it known that he wants to fight to limit the spread of weapons, responsible for the deaths of 40 thousand people a year in the United States.

The decision seems to be a way to escape the investigation launched by the New York federal prosecutor on a series of frauds and diversion of funds. The leaders of the National rifle association are involved in the case, which would have caused losses of over 63 million dollars in just three years. Last week, the prosecutor asked for the organization’s dissolution, symbolizing the second amendment of the US Constitution, guaranteeing the right to bear arms.

The NRA filed for federal bankruptcy in Dallas and said it intends to move to Texas to escape “a corrupt political and regulatory environment” in New York, contain and optimize costs and expenses. “Texas appreciates the contributions of the NRA, celebrates our law-abiding members, and joins us in upholding constitutional freedoms,” Lobby number one, Wayne La Pierre, wrote in a letter to members. In August, New York Attorney General Letitia James sued the NRA and its top management for mismanagement and financial fraud.

We thought it would take years for what was once a very powerful organization with 5 million members to be effectively canceled from the registers of the State, where it was founded in 1871. But in reality, the lobby, once able to elect presidents for some time now, is in crisis. Torn by financial difficulties and an internal war for leadership, it has long struggled for survival. Attorney James had already asked for the leaders’ resignation, accusing them of having stolen at least 64 million dollars from the organization’s bank accounts. At the same time, she asked that none of the executives involved direct any other organization in the future.

Established by retired army officers because “too many soldiers don’t even know how to shoot straight,” as General Ambrose Burnside, its first president, said. After having been little more than a sports association for a long time, in the last twenty ‘ years – ever since Wayne La Pierre became CEO, she has walked straight into the political chambers. It became shortly, the powerful lobby determining elections. If at one time, however, he invested in a bipartisan manner (years ago, Bernie Sanders also had funds and endorsements from them) for Trump, they made an exception. The Donald owes them a great deal. In fact, on the 2016 election, the NRA, which already controlled all the Republican senators, invested a good 30 million dollars. Support that the outgoing US President Donald Trump has publicly confirmed several times.

1 2 3 23

The World Reviews

The World Reviews provides latest world news and brief stories. To know more news about world follow us.