Current News Blog

I can’t say I’m much of a football fan, but I do have a powerful love of the city of New Orleans. I was born down there and my family is still spread all across southern Louisiana. When “Geaux Saints” turned into “Who Dat” it took over my Facebook wall months before the playoffs were even mentioned.

So I’m excited for the Crescent City’s turn of fortune. Everyone seems to agree, after Katrina and after the disaster that has been post-Katrina, the city needed it.

But there was something else the city got this weekend that it desperately needed: a new mayor. Mitch Landrieu (brother of Senator Mary and son of former mayor Moon) won a first round mayoral contest Saturday with a dominating 66 percent of the vote. It was a change the city needed and apparently also wanted in a large majority.

Landrieu outlined some of his priorities in his pre-game acceptance speech including getting New Orleans closer to Washington, finding a new police chief, and addressing New Orleans’ endemic violence:

Asked about the killing Friday of a 15-year-old honor student who was waiting for the school bus, Landrieu repeated his oft-repeated view that violent crime, especially against young black men at the hands of their peers, “is an American tragedy and a national shame.”

“It’s not something that we should accept, nor is it normal, ” he said. “It happens all around America, but it happens a lot in the city of New Orleans, and it’s critically important that the citizens of New Orleans understand, as we have spoken to many times in the campaign, that making the streets safe so that our sons and daughters can be protected on one end, or something as simple as being able to sit on your porch again or have your child ride your bike, is very important to all of us.”

“So, my message to them is: I hear you, and we understand, and we’re going to do something about it, ” he said.

Congratulations New Orleans, I hope this really is a new day.

Recently on the Current News Blog:
- Commercial Culture Wars – Lily Bixler
- Juarez high school killings – How much more can residents take?
- Autism’s Bad Apple -The MMR vaccine link reversal
- An Axis of Instability: Somali pirates capture N. Korean ship
- California Draws New Lines

You might want to schedule your beer refills and bathroom breaks during the actual game this year because word on the street is Super Bowl commercials will be as juicy as ever this time around.

As it turns out, more people tune in for Super Bowl ads than for the actual football game (51 percent compared to 49 percent), according to a Nielsen Co. survey from last month.

The coveted 39-second commercial slots go for as much as $2.8 million, down from $3 million last year. CBS had companies vying for the 45 minutes of ad space, but the network has the last say on what gets in.

It’s pretty clear why an ad of a man running over a woman for a bag of Doritos chips didn’t make the cut, but why not a commercial for a gay dating site that shows man-on-man action? A little out there for football watchers, perhaps.

The most controversial ad centers around a certain A-word that shall not be named. (okay, I give in… “a-bor-tion.”)

The incensing ad supposedly features Florida Quarterback Tim Tebow’s mother Pam talking about how, while pregnant with Tim, doctors advised her to abort the fetus because of expected fetal damages. Pam ignored the warnings and had the baby that would grow up to be a professional football player.

One point for the pro-life side.

But, wait, before you flip the score card…this just in: While pregnant, Mrs. Tebow was living in the Philippines where abortion is illegal. Will the commercial admit the fact that abortion wasn’t technically an option for Mrs. Tebow?

Women’s rights advocate and attorney Gloria Allred said the Focus on the Family advocacy ad would be misleading if it didn’t include all the details of the story.

And president of Women’s Media Center Jehmu Greene quipped on Fox News that “This is clearly a thinly veiled attempts to undermine a woman’s right to make reproductive rights.”

Planned Parenthood retaliated with an ad that references the Tebow commercial with former Viking Sean James and Olympic gold medalist Al Joyner saying they “respect and honor” Mrs. Tebow’s choice and that only women can make the best decisions about their health and their futures. “We’re working towards the day when every woman’s decision about her health and her family will be respected […] We celebrate our families by trusting women.”

One point for the pro-lifers.

But, before we get ahead of ourselves, how about a reality check?

No one has seen the ad yet. Focus on the Family hasn’t even released the script to anyone but CBS, who contradicting a longstanding policy to not run advocacy ads, approved the segment.

Planned Parenthood hasn’t bought any commercial time to air their public service announcement and a spokesperson for the organization said it felt their money was better spent on its health centers.

Though CBS plans to run the Tebow ad, the network nixed one for the Internet domain service GoDaddy.com. The company’s “Lola” ad racked up nearly 190,000 views on YouTube. It features a flamboyant football retire turned lingerie tycoon frolicking around with undressed women, pursing his lips at all the right moments.

And an ad by a gay-dating site that depicts two male sports fans cheering—and kissing—after a touchdown also won’t appear during the Super Bowl. Despite over 540,000 YouTube views, CBS rejected the ManCrunch commercial.

Doritos is better off not running this ad. Running people over in your car to get a bag of chips isn’t funny.

But CBC may have had its head up its ass on this one. This KGB directory assistance ad is funny, right?

We know it’s bad in Juarez. It’s been bad for a while now. But with the apparently accidental killing of at least fifteen at a Juarez high school party, it just seems like it keeps getting worse. The LA Times reports on a suspect who acted as a lookout for the shooters:

Officials summoned reporters to see the suspect, who said in their presence that the main Juarez-based drug cartel targeted the party because it had received reports that members of a rival trafficking group were in attendance.

The suspect, identified as Jose Dolores Arroyo Chavarria, said he acted as a lookout for the 24 or so gunmen he said took part. He said they were ordered to kill everyone inside.

Just horrible.

Meanwhile, it continues. From yesterday: 3 headless bodies found in ‘narco-grave,’ Mexican military says – CNN.com. That article puts the death toll in Juarez (just in Juarez) so far this year (just over a month) at 230 as of Monday.

How much longer will Juarez residents have to suffer this?

Recently on the Current News Blog:
- Autism’s Bad Apple -The MMR vaccine link reversal
- An Axis of Instability: Somali pirates capture N. Korean ship
- California Draws New Lines
- Did Israel assassinate a member of Hamas in Dubai?
- Mr. President, your patient is waiting: A Doctor’s Commentary

This guest post is a commentary from Dr. Sanjeev K. Sriram, MD, MPH a member of the National Physicians Alliance. Dr. Sriram is discussing the decision by medical journal The Lancet to retract a controversial 1998 research paper suggesting a link between the MMR vaccine and autism.

As a pediatrician and public health advocate, when I learned that the Lancet was finally retracting Andrew Wakefield’s bogus article that suggested a link between MMR vaccines and autism, I thought to myself, “Great, so we finally got rid of Wakefield’s bad apple, but what about the rest of the orchard?”

There is no doubt that Wakefield is one bad apple, and he must absolutely face the consequences for his disregard of basic ethics. According to the UK’s General Medical Council, Wakefield paid children 5 pounds at their birthday parties in exchange for their blood samples. By discrediting the old MMR, one of Wakefield’s side projects, a new vaccine he was inventing, would have made huge profits. The funding behind his “research” in the Lancet article was provided by a group of lawyers who just so happened to be suing the makers of MMR. These are more than just conflicts of interests, they are assaults on the trust between the general public and the scientific community. And for that, Wakefield deserves to have his medical license revoked, at the very least.

But I am weary of Wakefield becoming a scapegoat, which is often the result of too many authorities adopting the adage “one bad apple spoils the bunch.” Instead, I think we need to recognize that bad apples like Wakefield are the products of inattentive farming and inadequate sunlight in the medical-industrial research complex.

Though the scientific community may be frustrated every now and then by the mundane procedures of their institutional review boards (IRB’s), we need these ethics committees to be vigilant for the interests of patients and families. The pressure to produce profitable and popular answers to urgent questions is relentless. But in a world where the Supreme Court bestows corporations with the same rights as people, the scientific community must value the public’s trust above any individual researcher’s reputation, and above any industry’s revenue.

So in our justifiable criticism of Wakefield and the Lancet for their individual actions, I hope the medical establishment takes the time to realign its collective integrity.

Recently on the Current News Blog:
- An Axis of Instability: Somali pirates capture N. Korean ship
- California Draws New Lines
- Did Israel assassinate a member of Hamas in Dubai?
- Mr. President, your patient is waiting: A Doctor’s Commentary
- What’s your State of the Union wishlist?

An awesome confluence of rogue actors:

The MV Rim was seized in the Gulf of Aden, outside the internationally recommended transit corridor patrolled by the anti-piracy naval coalition, said Cmdr. Anders Kallin of the EU Naval Force.

The MV Rim has not had any communication with maritime authorities, but Kallin said an American warship, the USS Porter, and a helicopter from American warship USS Farragut confirmed the seizure of the ship to the EU.

The 4,800-ton ship is owned by White Sea Shipping of Libya. It is carrying unknown cargo and the number and nationalities of the crew are not known. The seized ship was heading toward the Somali coast and warships were monitoring the situation, the EU Naval Force said.

It really kind of can’t get any better than that, can it? The old Axis of Evil vs. the new Axis of Instability. Even Libya is involved! I mean maybe we could add “They announced it on Twitter and submitted a YouTube question to Obama from the open ocean.” But no seriously, the only way this story could get any better was to throw a little Al Qaeda in it.

Oh, what’s that? A link between Somali pirates and Al Qaeda? Do tell, Foreign Policy magazine:

Somalia has two big scourges these days: Islamist milititas the run most of the country (and are linked to al Qaeda) and piracy off the coast….But what if the two scourges are linked?…Last December, a Canadian intelligence report indicated that Shabaab was in fact training pirates for their “duties.” Further reporting from Jane’s (summarized here) notes how taxes are levied on the pirates’ booties. Yes, the pirates and the Islamists are definitely in cahoots.

All kidding aside, these sorts of links are worrisome. As global connectivity becomes more accessible, it’s not hard to imagine a world in which there truly is an “Axis of Instability” aligning terrorists, religious militants, pirates, drug gangs, etc. It’s a concern the DEA has put forward in their (alebit dubious) theories about Al Qaeda and the FARC. Let’s just hope that the hostage negotiations between North Korea and the Somali pirates don’t turn into partnership talks.

Recently on the Current News Blog:
- California Draws New Lines
- Did Israel assassinate a member of Hamas in Dubai?
- Mr. President, your patient is waiting: A Doctor’s Commentary
- What’s your State of the Union wishlist?

Last time I checked, a room full of white men is not an accurate representation of California’s demographic.

That’s why as California gears up to redraw its legislative boundaries to reflect new census data from 2010, the state is creating an independent and “depoliticized”  redistricting committee of 14 people that will supposedly mirror the real California. As the golden state continues to sputter in political gridlock, redistricting is beginning to catch on as an important issue. This is especially true in the wake of accusations that California legislatures have used boundaries as political tools or “incumbent protection plans.” California’s move to draw new lines could very well reflect a national trend. But before a collective pat on the back is in order for this political innovation, let’s dig into the can of worms we’re about to open up.

Think folks from all walks of life are lining up to be on this committee? Not so much.

Michael Krasny from NPR’s Forum pointed out the general perception that this redistricting work is arcane, boring, dull, and overall, not too sexy. We’re not seeing people quite as eager to jump on the civic engagement bandwagon like they were in 2008 when Obama called for grassroots campaigners, especially when this redevelopment work has traditionally been done by white men at the state capitol. Go figure.

But the state is trying its darndest to bring in 14 men and women who actually represent the diversity of California by the Feb. 12 deadline. But so far three-fourths of the current applicant pool is made up of white men.

These new lines drastically impact how the state represents its citizens and the real question remains: Can you get enough applicants from diverse areas in California to redraw district boundaries that the state Senate, Assembly and Board of Equalization will use to make political decisions?

California voters thought so in November 2008 when we passed the Voters FIRST Act, the proposition to create this Citizens Redistricting Commission. To sit on this committee you have to be a few things:

-You must be a registered California voter and you must have voted in at least two of the past three statewide general elections as a five-year dedicated political member of your party of choice.

- You can’t have  served on a school board, served on legislature, be a registered lobbyist, or a campaign contributor of $2,000 or more.

-Basically, you shouldn’t be too involved in politics.

These restrictions are meant to bring in people outside of the political junket, but maybe these efforts are more political than we think.

Michael Krasny pointed out that 60 percent of Californians are people of color but only 30 percent of them vote. Krasny, perhaps naively, asked one of  the guests on his show if “we have a problem with apathy.”

Nancy Ramirez, Western regional counsel for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund said that she didn’t want to call if apathy. “It goes along with a history of really putting barriers in place for the Latino community and other minority communities where there were restrictions in terms of making ballots available in other languages, and other discrimination measure put in place. After a while, people ask of their vote is really going to make a difference.”

Organizations like Ramirez’s are reaching out to widen the traditional breadth of applicants and working to educate people about the role of the redistricting commission.

This depoliticizing and “reach out” process are becoming expensive. Governor schwarzenegger just added $5 million to the $3 million originally designated to draw new lines.

Do you think we’ll see a state commission that looks like California?

Recently on the Current News Blog:
- Did Israel assassinate a member of Hamas in Dubai?
- Mr. President, your patient is waiting: A Doctor’s Commentary
- What’s your State of the Union wishlist?
- Help ProPublica with their Super Bowl Blitz

This post is from Dan Ucko, a former intern for Vanguard . Dan blogs at blog.plugintodan.com and he graduated from Cal Poly Pomona in 2009.

This week, our good friends in the government approved the merging of Ticketmaster and Livenation. The Justice Department, who oversees antitrust policy, says the joint will “preserve competition.”

I sincerely hope they are kidding. If we’re lucky enough to see ticket prices go down, the fees will surely only go up.

The latest in major corporate mergers gives the new company, Livenation Entertainment Inc. an 80 percent stranglehold on not just the concert market, but the music business as a whole. According to The Wall Street Journal:

The merger doesn’t significantly expand the market share of either company. Instead, it creates one company that will have a hand in just about every corner of the music business.

This vertical integration gives one corporation a piece of the pie in just about every aspect of music from ticket sales to artist management and concert promotion.

It might as well be Clear Channel all over again. Which, if you don’t recall from the early ’00s, was the corporate juggernaut of last decade, (still) running the majority of radio stations and live music events. Not to mention all the advertising needed to create one giant load of synergy. The conglomerate’s practices weren’t exactly friendly, and it pretty much forced any significant artist to run with Clear Channel stations and venues for fear of being dropped from of all of the subsidiaries.

For a much more recent example, we need only look back a little more than a month. General Electric just sold NBC Universal to Comcast on Dec. 9. With 51 percent in Comcast’s pockets (49 percent is still owned by G.E.), the nation’s largest cable provider now has even more power over what transmits through our tubes and how much it costs.

Consumer choice seems all but lost.

Perhaps today’s merger was unstoppable, but we have most assuredly created one more monster. The Wall Street Journal reports:

Live Nation stages more concerts and concert tours than any other promoter, and owns or operates 75 major venues in the U.S. Ticketmaster sells tickets for the majority of major sports and entertainment venues in the U.S., and has an artist management division that handles the affairs of hundreds of the biggest acts in pop, rock and country. Ticketmaster’s Front Line Management unit represents over 200 acts, ranging from veterans like the Eagles and Journey to newcomers like Miley Cyrus and Kings of Leon.

The only good news? A few restrictions thanks to Obama’s new antitrust chief Christine Varney:

•Livenation Entertainment Inc. will not be able to retaliate against artists that use competitors for ticket services — like when Clear Channel threatened to pull bands like Blink 182 off all its stations in 2001.

•Ticketing and concert promotion will have to be sold separately, not as a bundle, within the new company.

•Certain data will not be shared between departments to prevent the stifling of whatever competition is left.

Somehow, I get the feeling government isn’t really working these days. This is a failure of Washington on multiple fronts. These massive mergers are textbook cases for what our country’s antitrust laws are supposed to prevent.

Read the laws for yourself here.

…Certain acts are considered so harmful to competition that they are almost always illegal.

Recently on the Current News Blog:
- Did Israel assassinate a member of Hamas in Dubai?
- Mr. President, your patient is waiting: A Doctor’s Commentary
- What’s your State of the Union wishlist?
- Help ProPublica with their Super Bowl Blitz

Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, a senior military operative of Hamas, was found dead in a hotel room in Dubai last week. Authorities said he’d been electrocuted.

Authorities in Dubai confirmed al-Mabhouh was found dead in a hotel room a day after entering the emirate. Dubai’s government said in a statement that initial investigations show the crime was likely committed by a “professional criminal gang,” and that the suspects left the country before the body was discovered.

His compatriots blame Israeli assassins. Israel has not yet responded to the accusation.

This is a guest post from Dan Ucko. He is formerly an intern for Vanguard and blogs at blog.plugintodan.com. He graduated from Cal Poly Pomona in 2009.

I’ve been out of college for a little while now.

Six months, two weeks and one day to be exact.

Thing is, I’m not totally sure what I’m doing.

Then again, who is?

Options for college graduates are slim in this economy. And recovery isn’t happening overnight.

Jobs — or at least good ones — are still hard to come by.

One in 10 people in this country are unemployed. In California, it’s one in 12.

Fewer than 20 percent of 2009 grads that applied for a job have one, according to this survey. And it’s no better back in school.

State universities have been cutting courses and programs, like labs for science classes and student exchange programs. All with fewer days of education and tuition fees that keep increasing.

President Obama addressed the needs of the middle class during his first State of the Union address yesterday and expectations were high. He has plans on the way to help the job market, reform higher and lower education, cut taxes and keep his presidency accountable.

They’re minor in comparison to last year’s massive bailouts and the struggling healthcare overhaul, but not a bad start.

While the president attempted to bring back some of that hope we’ve all been missing, I was still left uneasy about the state of the nation.

My generation is experiencing the toughest times our age group has ever seen.

Today’s students, while often supported by their parents, have it harder than ever: we’re constantly under pressure to perform.

Between SAT scores, AP classes and GPAs, there’s always a new way of evaluating how qualified we are for the next step.

Yet, when do we have time to actually figure out what that next step is?

Personally, I’m in a hurry to stop losing money. I work part-time and freelance on the side, but the freelance market for writers isn’t exactly what it used to be.

Savings is a thing of the past. While my parents supported me through college, the deal was you’re on your own once you finish.

So I’m thrown into the wild with $15,000 in debt, not enough work in the field and little time to figure things out when rent is due each month.

There doesn’t appear to be any clear-cut path anymore.

“A high school diploma no longer guarantees a good job,” Obama told the nation yesterday. Yeah, well neither does a college degree.

But at least he’s listening. “In the United States of America, no one should go broke because they chose to go to college” was another line from his speech.

It was our generation that ushered him into office, after all, so we should be entitled to some high expectations.

Obama is promising a $10,000 tax subsidy for community college students and loan repayment reform that forgets a students’ debt after 20 years.

He’s also planning to give tax breaks to parents with kids in college, extend unemployment and create new green jobs.

It all sounds great. Let’s just hope it happens — sooner, rather than later.

For now, empower yourself: understand your student loans, watch the job market, and hold our president to his promises.

Recently on the Current News Blog:
- Mr. President, your patient is waiting: A Doctor’s Commentary
- What’s your State of the Union wishlist?
- Help ProPublica with their Super Bowl Blitz
- Trafficking Worries Amid Haiti Adoptions – Lily Bixler
- Sri Lanka Goes to the Polls

This guest post is a commentary from Dr. Sanjeev K. Sriram, MD, MPH a member of the National Physicians Alliance.

Like many physicians, I have had rough days in my office where my patients have been angry with me about long waits, difficult diagnoses, and therapies that don’t match the pretty commercials they see on TV.  On days like these, I have to take a deep breath, remember the oath I took, and focus on my patients.

The President and Congress face a similar situation right now as their patient, the American public, waits covered only in the flimsy hospital gown of our inadequate health care system.  They have been waiting with anxiety over insufficient insurance coverage, waiting with frustration over skyrocketing insurance premiums, waiting with confusion about the right treatment for this broken system.  And this reality did not change after the vote in Massachusetts.

Instead of giving in to frustration, Congress and the President must redouble their efforts to find a cure for our ailing health care system and stand by their patient.  During the past year, I have been impressed by the dedication of members of Congress, their staffs and the White House to, once and for all, help all Americans get meaningful health care coverage.  Just as a doctor doesn’t walk away from a suffering patient with a difficult diagnosis, our political leaders must complete the job that Americans elected them to do.  And the thing is, they are really close.

The Senate and House bills are similar in many core elements: they eliminate the worst of the insurance company abuses; create consumer-friendly insurance markets; help people afford insurance; change the way doctors and hospitals are paid to encourage high quality health care; increase the number of primary care doctors; and encourage prevention and wellness.

The two bills differ in some important ways including how we pay for reform, how much help low-income Americans will get, and how the new insurance exchanges will be structured.  There is, however, time to work out these differences later through budget reconciliation or in the 3 to 4 years before the legislation is fully implemented.

This is where President Obama and Congress need to take a page out of the overworked doctor’s playbook.  Patients come to their doctor because they trust them.  But that trust starts to waiver when they are kept waiting unnecessarily.

The American people have waited long enough. Right now, we have the opportunity to give them so much more than that flimsy hospital gown.  Congress can take a big step forward for patients and their families by passing the Senate bill, and then work on strategies to fine tune that legislation. To our President, Senators, and Representatives: it’s time to live up to the oaths you took.  It’s time to answer to voters’ demand for affordable, accessible health care.  Instead of giving in to frustration or political expediency, it’s time to prioritize patients over politics and finish health care reform right.  Our patients can’t wait.

Recently on the Current News Blog:
- What’s your State of the Union wishlist?
- Help ProPublica with their Super Bowl Blitz
- Trafficking Worries Amid Haiti Adoptions – Lily Bixler
- Sri Lanka Goes to the Polls
- Commentary: Roe v. Wade turns 37 – Lily Bixler