"Looks like patriotic cans haven’t saved Bud from declines in the United States. Sales of Budweiser and Bud Light keep falling and that’s taking a toll on the company’s results. While Bud Light remained the most popular beer in the United States by volume, at 35.2 million barrels, it was down 15 percent from its 2008 high. The Budweiser brand is growing elsewhere, but US drinkers are turning to craft brews made by smaller companies. Even America-first packaging, such as designs featuring military-inspired camouflage, hasn’t helped....."
Here is what they are talking about on the front page:
"Trump declares opioid crisis a ‘public health emergency’" by Julie Hirschfeld Davis October 27, 2017
WASHINGTON — President Trump announced Thursday that he is directing his Department of Health and Human Services to declare the opioid crisis a public health emergency, taking long-anticipated action to address a rapidly escalating epidemic of drug use in the United States.
The move falls short of Trump’s sweeping promise to declare a national emergency on opioids, which would have prompted the rapid allocation of federal funding to address the issue. The directive does not on its own release any money to deal with a drug crisis that has become a grim reality across the country, claiming more than 59,000 lives in 2016, but it would allow some grant money to be used for an array of efforts to combat opioid abuse and would ease certain laws and regulations to address it.
Trump, at a ceremony in the White House East Room attended by families affected by opioid abuse, members of Congress, and administration officials, said, “This epidemic is a national health emergency. We cannot allow this to continue. It is time to liberate our communities from this scourge of drug addiction.”
Administration officials argued Thursday that a national emergency declaration was not necessary or helpful in the case of the opioid crisis, and that the powers associated with a public health emergency were better suited to address the issue. The Trump administration, they said, would work with Congress to secure money to combat opioids in a year-end spending package.
Going to roll it into the tax plan (you do the math).
In August, Trump called the opioid crisis a “national emergency.” But he did not sign a formal declaration designating it as such, allowing the prospect to languish amid resistance in his administration about making an open-ended commitment of federal funds to deal with an issue that has shown no signs of abating. The crisis has claimed tens of thousands of lives.
Beyond the lack of funding, it is unclear how much impact the public health declaration will have in the short term, given that Trump has yet to name central players who would carry it out. That includes a drug czar. Representative Tom Marino, a Pennsylvania Republican whom Trump had named to lead the Office of National Drug Control Policy, withdrew last week after reports that he did the bidding of the pharmaceutical industry in weakening law enforcement’s ability to curb drug sales in efforts to block black-market sales of opioids. The White House has yet to announce a new candidate.
Here, take a look.
And Tom Price resigned last month as health secretary after it was revealed he was flying on private jets paid for with taxpayer dollars; a nominee has not been named for that post either.
But proponents, including some antiaddiction groups and physicians, contend Trump’s action is an important symbolic step that would raise awareness and elicit a new sense of urgency to deal with the opioid scourge.
The administration officials said a public health emergency declaration would quickly lead to crucial changes, including the potential to secure federal grant money and the expansion of access to telemedicine services, which would broaden the reach of treatment to rural areas ravaged by opioid use and where doctors are often in short supply.
PFFFFT!
How is looking at a computer screen going to help?
Trump’s promises to focus on the opioid crisis helped propel him to victory in New Hampshire’s primary last year.
As president, he formed an opioid commission in March and installed at the helm Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey, a rival for the Republican nomination who had championed the issue during the 2016 race. In July, the commission recommended that the president declare a national emergency — either under the Stafford Act, which would have prompted the allocation of Federal Emergency Management Agency funds, or the Public Health Service Act, the option Trump has chosen.
Price had ruled out the idea of a national emergency, in part because of concerns about the potentially exorbitant costs to the federal government. Still, Trump surprised his advisers by telling reporters soon after his commission’s report that he was ready to take just such a step.
In the meantime, members of Trump’s opioid commission and lawmakers in both parties had grown impatient for action.....
The next step is martial law, and who could argue?
--more--"
"Declaring an emergency sounds good — but people in Mass. ask, where are the dollars?" by Felice J. Freyer Globe Staff October 26, 2017
Addiction specialists and advocates in Massachusetts, one of the states hardest hit by the opioid epidemic, welcomed President Trump’s words Thursday declaring a public health emergency — but decried the lack of money and actions to back them up.
“It’s disgraceful,” said Kurt Isaacson, CEO of Spectrum Health Systems, a nonprofit addiction-treatment provider based in central Massachusetts.
The emergency declaration “falls far short of actions that are needed to immediately address the magnitude and scope of this epidemic,” said Michael Botticelli, who was director of national drug control policy in the Obama administration [and is now] executive director of the Grayken Center for Addiction at Boston Medical Center.
The thing mushroomed on his watch.
But Dr. Peter D. Friedmann, an addiction clinician and researcher at BayState Health in Springfield agreed that the declaration carried symbolic importance. But he added, “We didn’t need a symbolic gesture to know this is a public health emergency. What we need is funding to deliver necessary harm reduction and medical treatment services to address the problem.”
Maybe if the CIA would quit smuggling it and the banks would stop laundering the money.... sigh.
With more than 2,000 opioid-related deaths tallied last year, Massachusetts has one of the most severe addiction problems in the nation. Governor Charlie Baker has publicly made addressing the opioid crisis a cornerstone of his administration.
Baker, a Republican, also serves on Trump’s bipartisan opioid commission. On Thursday his spokeswoman, Lizzy Guyton, said the governor “believes that declaring this deadly epidemic a national public health emergency is a strong step in the right direction and is thankful for the president’s focus on the issue.”
But the Massachusetts Democratic Party called on Baker to resign from Trump’s opioid commission, saying it “continues to dole out empty promises.’’
Senator Edward J. Markey also used strong words to denounce the president’s declaration: “America is hemorrhaging lives by the day because of the opioid epidemic, but President Trump offered the country a Band-Aid when we need a tourniquet.”
Sarah Porter, vice president and chief operating officer of Victory Programs, a Boston addiction treatment agency, said as she listened to Trump’s talk, she waited in vain for him to indicate support for Medicaid, the health program for the poor that pays for the care of 96 percent of her clients — and that the president’s budget would slash.
“I look outside my window and there are a ton of people who appear to be in need of additional services,” Porter said.....
I'll bet!
--more--"
Now let's hit the streets:
"Mass. Senate passes sweeping criminal justice bill after emotional debate" by Joshua Miller Globe Staff October 26, 2017
The Massachusetts Senate early Friday passed a sweeping bill that would upend state laws on crime and punishment, aiming to reduce the number of people ensnared in the thicket of the criminal justice system and ease the tough-on-crime approach of decades past. The vote was 27-10.
All of a sudden the $y$tem is a thicket.
“We have to lift people up, not lock people up,” said Senator William N. Brownsberger, the legislation’s top author, on the Senate floor. “We have to cut the chains that hold people down when they are trying to get back up on their feet.”
The legislation, which passed just before 1:30 a.m. after more than 14 hours of debate, would repeal mandatory minimum prison sentences for several drug-dealing crimes such as selling heroin within 300 feet of a school; make those changes retroactive so dealers will be able to earn release weeks or months early; legalize sex between young teens close in age; raise the age of criminal responsibility from 18 to 19, the highest in the nation; and diminish the procession of fees, fines, and license suspensions that people accused or convicted of a crime often must endure.
However, nine of the state’s 11 district attorneys warned in a letter Monday against a “return to the old and discredited ways of the past.” They said that “many of the proposals contained in this legislation turn the clock back.”
Sorry, but I'm with the DAs on this one.
And law enforcement officials — who hope the House of Representatives proposes a more prosecutor-friendly bill — point to the state’s relatively low incarceration rate as proof of Massachusetts’ more enlightened position.
In 2015, Massachusetts had the second-lowest imprisonment rate, with 179 sentenced prisoners for every 100,000 people, according to the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics. Nationally, 458 prisoners were sentenced to more than one year in state or federal prison per 100,000 US residents.
Thursday’s debate turned emotional at times.
Brownsberger, a Belmont Democrat and former defense lawyer, implored his colleagues to look to their conscience.
“I’m asking you, all of the members of this body, to do something extraordinarily difficult, which is to vote on deeply controversial issues,” he said, his voice repeatedly breaking with emotion.
How touching.
Just wondering why they dragged their feet on medical marijuana regulations, etc.
Brownsberger requested that his colleagues think as they vote of the “people who have limited alternative options in life and got down the wrong path,” he said. “And make decisions with those people in mind.”
But Senator Bruce E. Tarr, the GOP leader, responded that it’s essential to also keep the victims of crime in mind.
“There is a reason for incarceration, Mr. President,” Tarr said, speaking to Senator Stanley C. Rosenberg, an Amherst Democrat and proponent of the bill.
The state’s scourge of opioid overdoses serves as a key backdrop. Opponents say it’s the wrong time to ease mandatory minimum sentences for drug dealers who are dispensing misery and death across the state.
Proponents say it’s important to make sure low-level dealers, who are often addicts themselves, get help rather than time in prison. The current system, they say, is not working.
And there is not enough money for treatment.
At least GE, Hollywood, and all the rest are getting their millions in tax loot set asides.
The bill changes drug penalties in both directions.
It would do away with several mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses, such as trafficking up to 100 grams of cocaine or methamphetamine. That would give judges and parole board members much wider discretion on incarceration.
It would also make the changes retroactive, giving hundreds of dealers the chance to earn early release.
The bill would strengthen penalties for crimes such as trafficking the potent opioid fentanyl.
Related: A puppy apparently overdosed after accidentally ingesting opioids in Andover
Good thing, too, because he was running wild.
The debate touched on other hot-button issues in the bill, including raising the age of criminal majority from 18 to 19. That change would mean all but the most serious offenses committed by 18-year-olds would likely be adjudicated in secret before a juvenile court judge.
Advocates say 18-year-old brains are still evolving, and it makes sense to treat high school-aged youth the same way in the criminal justice system. Senator Karen E. Spilka said that 18-year-olds deserve the chance to make mistakes and learn from their mistakes, and that raising the age would help reduce recidivism.
But opponents, including a Democratic and a Republican senator, expressed concerns about 18-year-olds having the same rights as 19-year-olds but not having to face the same penalties for the same crimes. Eighteen-year-olds can, after all, vote, sign contracts, and serve in the military, they argue.
Can't drink, though.
An amendment that would keep the current system in place, with 18-year-olds being tried as adults, was rejected 20-17.
Among other provisions of the bill: so-called Romeo and Juliet language legalizing sex between teens close in age; forbidding parents from testifying against their children in almost all criminal and juvenile delinquency matters; increasing how often men in the state’s toughest solitary confinement get a hearing; and reducing driver’s license suspensions for nondriving events like missing a court appearance.
Debate in the Senate stretched late into the evening Thursday — and then into the first hours of Friday — as senators worked through more than 160 amendments. During lulls in the Senate chamber, as amendments were redrafted by staff, some legislators schoomozed with colleagues and lobbyists, others poked at their smart phones, while still others appeared to momentarily rest their eyes.
Did they read any of them?
In the final tally, four Democrats — Senators Eileen M. Donoghue of Lowell, Kathleen O’Connor Ives of Newburyport, Anne M. Gobi of Spencer, and Michael F. Rush of Boston — joined the chamber’s six Republicans in voting against the bill.
The bill’s passage, longtime State House observers say, marks the starkest example yet of the state chamber’s decisive shift to the ideological left in recent years.
But from here, the legislation faces an uncertain future.
The more conservative House of Representatives, also controlled by Democrats, is poised to release its own omnibus criminal justice legislation, expected to be far less sweeping, in the coming weeks.
Governor Charlie Baker, a Republican, has expressed discomfort with several provisions of the Senate bill, and praised some current criminal justice trends like the 16 percent drop in the state prison population since January 2015.....
--more--"
They do nothing for months after the pay raise, and then this is shoved through in a day!?
WTF?
Time for a cup of coffee.
