House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell
Alex Wong/Getty Images; Sarah Silbiger/Getty Images
Nearly half of Americans believe that "Republicans in Congress and Senator Mitch McConnell" was to blame for the inability to pass the $2,000 stimulus checks, according to a new poll published by the progressive think tank Data for Progress.
Nearly one-third said the failure to pass the $2,000 checks was due to "Democrats in Congress and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi," according to the same poll.
House lawmakers voted in favor of bumping the second round stimulus checks to $2,000 from $600, but Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell refused to consider a standalone bill to increase the check amount.
Nearly half of respondents to a newly released poll blamed Republican lawmakers and Senat Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for Congress' inability to agree on $2,000 stimulus checks.
The new poll, published Friday by the left-leaning think tank Data for Progress, revealed that 47% of 1,166 people surveyed responded that "Republicans in Congress and Senator Mitch McConnell" were to blame for the delay in reaching a consensus on the checks.
In comparison, 32% said it was "Democrats in Congress and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi." Just 15% of respondents said President Donald Trump was to blame.
After months of failures and stalled negotiations, lawmakers finally came to a consensus on a new coronavirus relief package at the end of December. President Trump initially refused to sign the deal, complaining about various provisions and urging that Congress include $2,000 stimulus checks, before eventually signing the bill on Sunday. The signed bill includes $600 stimulus checks.
After the bill was signed, House lawmakers voted on a separate bill to bump the $600 stimulus checks up to $2,000. But the bill faces a roadblock in the Senate - McConnell recently rebuffed efforts to pass a standalone bill to increase the stimulus checks, Business Insider's Oma Seddiq reported.
John Locher/AP and Odd Andersen/AFP via Getty Images
Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk alone increased their net worth by $217 billion last year, according to Bloomberg.
For this amount, more than 100 million Americans can receive $2,000 checks.
Collectively, the net worth of the world's 500 richest people rose to about $1.8 trillion, a 31% increase that represents the largest annual gain in the eight years that Bloomberg has tracked these figures.
While many Americans were economically upended by the coronavirus pandemic, and now await a decision from Congress on whether they'll receive a $2,000 stimulus check soon, the world's richest people had raked in record gains in 2020.
Last year, Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk collectively increased their net worth by $217 billion last year, an amount that could cut $2,000 checks for more than 100 million Americans.
The world's richest person, Amazon CEO Bezos, is now worth about $190 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. And Tesla founder and CEO Elon Musk took second place with about $170 billion, surpassing Microsoft's Bill Gates.
Musk's net worth, in particular, grew the fastest in 2020, Bloomberg reported. His net worth is primarily made up of Tesla shares, of which he owns about 75%, according to Bloomberg.
These figures come as millions of people in the United States remain jobless because of the economic devastation brought on by the coronavirus pandemic.
Congress in March passed the first coronavirus stimulus package, which included $1,200 in direct payments to Americans. It was an attempt to offset the financial ruin after small businesses nationwide were shuttered to curtail the spread of the virus.
Americans waited nine months to receive a second stimulus check. In December, Congress finally reached a deal on the second stimulus relief package, an agreement that included $600 checks to taxpayers.
Meanwhile, employment rates have been steadily rising in the US. But the November jobs report from the Labor Department said about 15 million people did not work that month because of the pandemic.
Globally, the outlook is much grimmer.
In a report released last year, the World Bank predicted that global poverty would rise in 2020 for the first time in more than two decades because of the coronavirus pandemic.
"The newest and most immediate threat to poverty reduction, COVID-19, has unleashed a worldwide economic disaster whose shock waves continue to spread," an overview from the World Bank reads. "Without an adequate global response, the cumulative effects of the pandemic and its economic fallout, armed conflict, and climate change will exact high human and economic costs well into the future."
Collectively, the net worth of the world's 500 richest people grew about $1.8 trillion last year, according to Bloomberg. It's a 31% increase that represents the largest annual gain in the eight years that Bloomberg has tracked these figures.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell speaks to reporters as Senate Republican leaders hold a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, December 1, 2020.
Kevin Lamarque/Reuters
US Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell's Louisville, Kentucky home was vandalized in graffiti on Saturday, according to local news.
The spray-painted message on the GOP's door states "Weres my money" in spray-paint, according to WDRB-TV.
"Vandalism and the politics of fear have no place in our society," McConnell said in a statement Saturday morning, according to the Louisville Courier-Journal.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's home in California was also vandalized with spray-paint on her garage door and a dead pig's head in her driveway.
A photo of the door of McConnell's home in Louisville, Kentucky shows the spray-painted message stating "Weres my money", according to WDRB-TV. The news station reported local authorities are not aware of the perpetrators responsible for the vandalism.
WDRB-TV's Grace Hayba who broadcasted live in front of his residence said McConnell's home doesn't appear to have any additional damage.
McConnell responded to the incident in a statement on Saturday calling it a "radical tantrum," the Louisville Courier-Journal reported.
"I've spent my career fighting for the First Amendment and defending peaceful protest. I appreciate every Kentuckian who has engaged in the democratic process whether they agree with me or not," McConnell said, according to the Courier-Journal.
"Vandalism and the politics of fear have no place in our society," he added.
Bharat Biotech is also developing India's first indigenous vaccine candidate. It is the third drugmaker to request government approval of its Covid vaccine.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, prepares to receive his first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine at the National Institutes of Health on December 22, 2020 in Bethesda, Maryland.
Patrick Semansky-Pool/Getty Images
Institutions like hospitals and possibly schools will mandate that a person receives a COVID-19 vaccination, Dr. Anthony Fauci predicted.
"I would not be surprised, as we get into the full scope of [COVID-19] vaccination, that some companies, some hospitals, some organizations might require [COVID-19] vaccination," he said in an interview with Newsweek.
Vaccine rollout has been slower than anticipated. About 3.5 million doses have been given out since the Food and Drug Administration approved Pfizer and Moderna's vaccines.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's leading infectious disease expert, said he expects the coronavirus vaccination to be mandatory in some institutions in the future.
In an interview with Newsweek published Friday, Fauci said he's "sure" institutions like hospitals will mandate the vaccine.
"I'm not sure [the vaccine is] going to be mandatory from a central government standpoint, like federal government mandates," he said. "But there are going to be individual institutions that I'm sure are going to mandate it."
Fauci pointed to his own experience with the National Institutes of Health, which mandates all employees and contractors receive yearly influenza and Hepatitis B vaccines.
"I have to get certified every year," he told Newsweek. "If I didn't, I couldn't see patients. So in that regard, I would not be surprised, as we get into the full scope of [COVID-19] vaccination, that some companies, some hospitals, some organizations might require [COVID-19] vaccination."
Fauci, the longtime director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, also said schools might be among the institutions that mandate the vaccine. It is also "quite possible," he said, that the vaccine will be required for travel to and from the United States.
"Everything will be on the table for discussion" within the incoming Biden administration, he said. The Biden transition team did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The decision to standardize the vaccine as a travel requirement is not one that Fauci can make, he said. But he thinks it would be a smart move, he told Newsweek.
"Yellow fever's a good example. So we, in this country, don't require [people] to get a yellow fever vaccine when you go [to] some place. It's the place to which you are going that requires it," he said. "I went to Liberia during the ebola outbreak. I had to get my yellow fever vaccine or they would not let me into Liberia."
In the United States, about 3.5 million doses have been given out since the Food and Drug Administration approved Pfizer and Moderna's vaccines.
Business Insider's Susie Neilson previously reported that the vaccine rollout has been slower than anticipated, and at this rate, it will take nine years to reach widespread vaccination.
"The effort to distribute and administer the vaccine is not progressing as it should," Biden said in Wilmington, Delaware. At this rate, he said, "it's going to take years, not months, to vaccinate the American people."
Virginia state Sen. Ben Chafin died on Friday from complications related to COVID-19, according his state legislative office.
Chafin, a Republican who represented a rural district in Southwest Virginia, was 60 years old.
Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam and the Virginia Senate Republican Caucus, who confirmed Chafin's death, immediately issued words of praise for the senator, who was elected to the state's House of Delegates in 2013 before joining the Senate in 2014.
Chafin, an attorney, had been hospitalized with the coronavirus for roughly two weeks before his death. While several Virginia state legislators have contracted the highly infectious disease, he is the first Virginia lawmaker to pass away from complications related to the coronavirus, according to The Richmond Times-Dispatch.
"Southwest Virginia has lost a strong advocate - and we have all lost a good man," Northam expressed in a written statement. "I knew Ben as a lawmaker, an attorney, a banker, and a farmer raising beef cattle in Moccasin Valley, working the land just as generations of his family had done before him.
Chafin's Republican and Democratic colleagues saluted his life and service to the commonwealth.
"Ben was deeply and wholeheartedly committed to the commonwealth, and especially to the people of Southwest Virginia," said state Senate GOP leader Thomas K. Norment Jr. in a statement. "He put the interests of those he was entrusted to serve first, cherishing the people of the region he proudly called 'home.'"
"We grieve the loss of our colleague and friend, Senator Ben Chafin," said the Democratic Senate caucus in a statement. "He was a passionate leader who represented his constituents of the 38th District in Southwest Virginia with such compassion, strength, and thoughtfulness."
Chafin is survived by his wife, Lora and their three children, along with his sister and grandchildren.
Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, there have been roughly 355,000 confirmed infections and over 5,000 deaths in Virginia, according to the latest data compiled by Johns Hopkins University.
Tesla had set a goal of 500,000 deliveries for 2020. On Saturday, it announced it missed the target by 450 vehicles.
Some analysts had said the ambitious target could be tough to reach because of a slump in auto sales during the coronavirus pandemic.
The company reached its production goal for the year, making a total of 509,737 vehicles. It also said production of its mid-size SUV, the Model Y, has begun in Shanghai.
Tesla just missed its goal of delivering 500,000 vehicles last year, the company announced Saturday.
The electric automaker delivered 499,550 vehicles in 2020, 450 shy of CEO Elon Musk's target.
Some analysts had said the ambitious target could be tough to reach because of a slump in auto sales during the coronavirus pandemic.
Consumers cut back spending on cars during the pandemic and Tesla's sales in the first half of 2020 dropped 15% from the second half of 2019. To reach its 500,000 deliveries goal, the automaker needed to sell about 181,650 vehicles in the final three months of the year - 30% more than the third quarter.
In an earnings call in October, Tesla acknowledged the 500,000 goal had "become more difficult," but said it could reach the target if it produces more Model Y and Shanghai vehicles, as well as make its logistics and delivery more efficient.
The automaker delivered 180,570 electric vehicles in the fourth quarter and produced 179,757 vehicles, it said.
The company said Saturday that its delivery numbers "should be viewed as slightly conservative" because it only counts a car as delivered if it is transferred to the customer and all paperwork is correct. "Final numbers could vary by up to 0.5% or more" when it announces its fourth quarter earnings, it said.
The company reached its production goal for the year, making a total of 509,737 vehicles. It also said production of its mid-size SUV, the Model Y, has begun in Shanghai.
"So proud of the Tesla team for achieving this major milestone! At the start of Tesla, I thought we had (optimistically) a 10% chance of surviving at all," Musk tweeted Saturday.
Demand from China was a boon to Tesla in 2020, with the automaker selling roughly 22,000 Model 3 vehicles there in November.
A judge will rule on January 4, 2021 on whether Assange should be extradited to the US.
Reuters
The US wants to extradite Julian Assange from the UK to face unprecedented charges for publishing government documents leaked by Chelsea Manning in 2010.
The indictment could put Assange in prison for 175 years and could mark the end of First Amendment protections on journalism everywhere.
Prosecuting Assange for exposing war crimes and human rights abuses is a threat to free speech, press freedoms, the public's right to know, and the ability to hold our government accountable.
Ben Cohen is an activist, businessman, and cofounder of Ben and Jerry's. He divides his time between AssangeDefense.org, @DropTheMic2020, and working to end qualified immunity.
This is an opinion column. The thoughts expressed are those of the author.
With each passing day, it becomes more obvious that President Donald Trump views the media as his enemy. But with the pandemic, criminal justice reform, the presidential election, and now COVID-19 relief bill talks dominating headlines, little attention has been paid to the long-term damage caused by Trump's hatred of a free press.
Right now, Julian Assange, the publisher of WikiLeaks, is facing an extradition trial in England because Trump's Justice Department has hit him with an unprecedented indictment - seeking 175 years in prison for what experts consider customary newsgathering and publishing activities.
Charging Assange sets a dangerous precedent for the freedom of press
I had the privilege of meeting Assange during his time in the Ecuadorian embassy. Assange cares deeply about the public's right to know what governments do in their name. He cares about peace. He thought that by bringing this information to light, he could make the world a better place by bringing an end to foolish wars. Call him naive if you want, but he is not our enemy. The world needs individuals with Assange's passion and commitment to truth.
The American Civil Liberties Union's (ACLU) Ben Wizner warns that the charges against Assange are "an extraordinary escalation of the Trump administration's attacks on journalism, and a direct assault on the First Amendment."
The Trump Justice Department and its defenders rationalize this assault on press freedom with smoke and mirrors. They distract the public by changing the subject with what Noam Chomsky and Alice Walker call "inconsequential personality profiles." They downplay the danger of this indictment by suggesting that Assange is not a journalist. Even if you ignore the countless journalism awards WikiLeaks received and the full-throated condemnation of the charges from journalism organizations, this rhetorical sleight of hand is easy to see through. WikiLeaks is a journalistic enterprise that takes a more transparent approach than most, providing readers with curated source documents alongside more conventional reporting.
These semantic arguments over whether someone is a journalist or not miss the point. Journalism isn't about where you work. It's about what you do. Trevor Timm, founder of the Freedom of the Press Foundation, testified at Assange's extradition: "In the US, the First Amendment protects everyone. Whether you consider Assange a journalist doesn't matter, he was engaging in journalistic activity." Most importantly, the conduct Assange has been indicted for is textbook "journalistic behavior": communicating with sources and gathering, possessing, and publishing sensitive information.
Expertsagree that a successful prosecution of Assange would undermine the First Amendment, and would particularly cripple investigative journalism. All journalism aims to inform the public, but what makes investigative journalism so vital to democracy is its power to inform us about what is deliberately hidden from our view.
Criminalizing journalism is 'killing the messenger'
The saying "don't kill the messenger" is as old as civilization itself, but we forget to take it to heart sometimes. People blast the bearers of bad news for "blaming America," as if being honest with ourselves is something shameful. Greatness depends on our willingness to look ourselves in the mirror and right the wrongs in our lives and in our society.
Without a free press shining light on the government, we are unable to hold our government accountable. Freedom of the press and freedom of speech are necessary for us to form opinions and choose leaders. Without the information that a free press provides, we can only stumble around in the dark, blind to the realities of the world and the conduct of our government. A blind public is unable to see society's problems, let alone fix them.
If we care about a free press, we must defend Assange
The Washington Post's Bob Woodward's revelations that Trump misled the public on the dangers of COVID-19 should serve as a stark reminder of the important role journalists play in our democracy. And the reports that Trump offered Assange a pardon if he would publicly exonerate his campaign (and Russia) over the DNC leaks are a huge red flag.
If the reports are true, then Assange chose to not lie for Trump, and as a result he is now the first journalist in our history to be indicted for publishing truthful information. You don't have to like Assange personally or be happy with the stories WikiLeaks has broken, but if we care about a free press, we must defend Assange.
As we transition to a new administration, we should remember the previous one. The Obama-Biden record on war, transparency, and whistleblowers was not perfect, but President Obama respected democracy. He did not make the press his enemy. And even though the WikiLeaks disclosures embarrassed his administration, Obama showed restraint by not prosecuting Assange.
All citizens, regardless of their politics, should be outraged. But I don't want to tell people that they should be outraged; I want to give them information that makes them outraged - that their government is escalating its war on journalism.
After all, a war on journalists is not just a war on the messenger. It is a war on some of America's most important legal, cultural, and political traditions. It is a war on our right to know and our ability to participate in important debates. It's a war on democracy itself.
Before COVID-19, many climate change advocates called for decreased tourism.
Khaled Desouki/AFP via Getty Images
With the new vaccine, many are hoping international travel and tourism will resume soon, but it's not clear when and how it will happen or what it means for climate change.
Travel regulations like vaccination passports, digital travel passes, and touchless travel might be the new norm as vaccines begin to roll out.
Most destinations will likely compete over tourism dollars when the borders reopen, so it's up to communities, governments, and the industry to drive behavior change and decarbonization.
The COVID-19 pandemic brought the global tourism industry to a screeching halt in 2020. With vaccines starting to be rolled out, there is hope international travel can resume soon, but exactly when - and how - is the million-dollar question.
However, with almost no international travel in 2020, we now have the opposite problem. The pandemic caused a 70% drop in international tourist arrivals globally from January to August, compared to the same period last year.
But attempts to reboot international travel on a wider scale have so far failed due to successive waves of COVID-19.
As a more transmissible and harder-to-control coronavirus variant has emerged in the UK and South Africa in recent days, dozens of countries have announced they would close their doors to travelers from both nations. Some countries, like Japan and Israel, have gone a step farther, banning all foreign nationals from entering.
Even before this, travel bubbles and corridors between countries have been proposed, but few have managed to take root.
With borders closed, many countries have put a focus on attracting domestic tourists instead. This has helped maintain economic stability in countries such as China and Japan.
Beyond this, we believe getting people back in the air again will be shaped by three key issues.
1. What travel regulations will prove effective?
Travel health requirements may soon start to resemble the past. In the 1970s, having appropriate vaccinations and health clearances was essential for travel to and from many countries. Coronavirus vaccinations will likely become similarly standard for international flights.
One solution may be the CommonPass, a new digital health passport that looks to be a trustworthy model for validating people's COVID-free status consistently across the globe.
Other health measures will also remain vital, including mandatory in-flight masks, pre-departure and arrival testing, mandatory quarantining, and social distancing. If vaccination uptake in destinations is low, these measures will become even more important.
Lengthy quarantine periods are one of the biggest obstacles to restarting international tourism - few people can afford 14 days in a quarantine hotel on top of their holiday.
There are potential alternatives being tested. Before the new COVID variant emerged, British Airways and American Airlines had piloted a voluntary testing program for some passengers as a way of avoiding the mandatory 14-day quarantine period in the UK.
Many planes are now parked in deserts in the US and Australia. They will need to be retrieved and thoroughly serviced before recommencing flights. Crews will have to be rehired or retrained.
But it's not as simple as just getting planes back in the air. A more formidable challenge for airlines will be reestablishing air routes while ensuring their ongoing viability.
As airlines slowly build up these networks again, travelers will have to put up with less frequent connections, longer journeys, and drawn out stopovers.
There is some encouraging news, though. In the US, domestic airfares have dropped, and though international flight schedules have been drastically reduced, low demand has kept some prices down.
Airports, meanwhile, will require temporary or permanent reconfigurations to handle new public heath screening and testing arrangements - providing yet another possible frustration for travelers.
The Thanksgiving holiday in the US and Golden Week in China suggest the appetite for travel remains robust. Some analysts also anticipate leisure travel will likely recover faster than business travel.
However, it remains to be seen whether travelers will have a high appetite for risk, or how quickly they'll adapt to new safety protocols.
However, the likely reality is that destinations will be desperate for economic recovery and will compete vigorously for tourism dollars when borders reopen.
So, if consumer behavior trends are anything to go by, the new normal might not be too dissimilar from the old. It's doubtful, for example, that we would tolerate flying less when travel is proven safe again. This doesn't bode well for the planet.
If international travel is going to "build back better", communities, governments, and the global tourism industry must come up with a transformative plan that is workable and helps drive traveler behavior change and decarbonization.
The pandemic has given us a chance for a reset - we should make the most of the opportunity.
