Videos die BETRUG sind! – Zeo und das Internet

Verrückte Trash-, Pannen- und Katzen-Videos!
Domtendos Betrug Momente, Iron Baby und eine langgezogene Micky Maus!

#Werbung
Probiere jetzt die ultimative tropische Fruchtexplosion Maracuja mit Laserfokus von Just Legends! Dazu einen Shaker gratis + 20% Rabatt mit ZEO20: https://bit.ly/3sEDa2G

Alle Folgen von Zeo und das Internet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdZLCvuz-rU&list=PLG0uf6uWHNOuAABa_QwFTrqulpQh6-7Bp&ab_channel=Zeo

Domtendo: https://youtu.be/TiUIDrLUfyg
GTA 5: https://youtu.be/GReU-jYyt6o
Küche versaut: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUkJWuRfuhk&t=110s
Moderatorin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qL3zjxScvPA&t=1s
Blitz: https://youtu.be/zPC-u5fP6GA
Benlaxer: https://youtu.be/Q0NDVlrE9ns
Katzen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tH_bhuYoSsM
Mathe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XNusOM9pZY
MickyMaus: https://youtu.be/_HFO5fkDwWc
Iron Baby: https://youtu.be/SyoA4LXQco4

Twitch: http://www.twitch.tv/zeosite
Mitglied werden: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrQWlbBlEp8dCLMu4k2NgkA/join
Mein Buch: https://www.amazon.de/Psychokillers-Roman-von-Thomas-Maier/dp/1983206350/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1537373824&sr=8-1&keywords=Psychokillers
Wolki-Kissen: https://mdrsh.de/zeo

Werde Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/Zeo
Hier gibt es meinen Merch: https://www.yvolve.de/zeo
Hier kannst du Trinkgeld geben: https://www.tipeeestream.com/zeosite/donation

FOLGT MIR:
Discord-Server: https://discord.gg/zeoelite
Tik Tok: Zeosite
Facebook: http://goo.gl/RycZk6
Twitter: http://goo.gl/yx1Qql
Instagram: http://goo.gl/nF1Dhr
Facebook-Profil: https://www.facebook.com/thomas.maier.3367

ZeoLive: www.youtube.com/zeozockt
Beste Freunde oder so: www.youtube.com/zeoreallive

Tex. bill requires OEM procedures, proof of ‘like kind and quality,’ neutral labor rate surveys

A sweeping auto insurance reform measure approved by the Texas House Insurance Committee in 2019 is back for the Lone Star State’s 2021 legislative session.

House Bill 1131 contains virtually identical language to the substitute version of HB 1348 the committee reported favorably in a 6-1 vote. But the 2019 bill never received a vote on the House floor that year.

Both bills were sponsored by Rep. Travis Clardy, R-Nacogdoches. No other representatives have signed on as co-sponsors yet this year to HB 1131, but 2019’s HB 1348 ultimately drew four other authors: Reps. Leo Pacheco, D-San Antonio (the original co-sponsor); Julie Johnson, D-Farmers Branch; Stan Lambert, R-Abilene; and Hubert Vo, D-Alief. All of them serve in the Legislature this session.

HB 1131 declares that a carrier can’t “disregard a repair operation or cost identified by an estimating system, including the system’s procedural pages and any repair, process, or procedure recommended by the original equipment manufacturer of a part or product. ”

In addition to demanding insurers acknowledge repair procedures, the bill defines “(r)easonable and necessary amount” as “the amount determined by the original equipment manufacturer ’s manufacturer and estimating systems required to repair a vehicle to the condition before the covered damage to the vehicle occurred.”

But it allows insurers to disregard OEM procedures in the case of installing a part “that is of like kind and quality as an original equipment manufacturer part or product.” The Insurance Committee added this language back in 2019 to the predecessor HB 1348.

The bill also defines “like kind and quality” and what constitutes an acceptable “prevailing rate” survey. It bans certain steering tactics, though it grants insurers an exemption with regards to repairers who exclusively handle auto glass.

Defining ‘like kind and quality’ and prevailing rate

“(L)ike kind and quality” is defined as follows:

An insurer described by Subsection (a) may not consider a specified part or product for the repair of a motor vehicle to be of like kind and quality as an original equipment manufacturer part or product for any purpose unless the insurer or the manufacturer of the specified part or product has conclusively demonstrated that the specified part or product:

(1) meets the fit, finish, and quality criteria established for the part or product by the original equipment manufacturer of the part or product;

(2) is the same weight and metal hardness established for the part or product by the original equipment manufacturer of the part or product; and

(3) has been tested using the same crash and safety test criteria used by the original equipment manufacturer of the part or product.

“Prevailing rate” would involve a “transparent and unbiased” one “conducted by a third party” that uses the “posted retail labor rates and not direct repair program shop rates that operate under a contract with an insurer.”

Antisteering measures

Besides clearing up who actually is charging a prevailing rate, HB 1131 would fight steering by banning insurers from requiring claimants to use preferred shops “in order for the beneficiary to obtain the repair without owing any out-of-pocket cost other than the deductible.” It also says a carrier can’t be:

(2) intimidating, coercing, or threatening the beneficiary to induce the beneficiary to use a particular repair person or facility; or

(3) offering an incentive or inducement, other than a warranty issued by a repair person or facility, for the beneficiary to use a particular repair person or facility.

The bill also restricts what insurers can tell claimants. They aren’t allowed to “offer, communicate, or suggest in any manner that a particular repair person or facility will provide faster repair times, faster service, or more efficient claims handling than another repair person or facility.”

Insurers get an exemption with regards to “a person who exclusively provides automobile glass replacement, glass repair services, or glass products.” The “repair person or facility” definition specifically excludes those glass-only shops.

The bill could face an uphill fight this session not because of its content but because of bad luck and timing.

Texas’ Legislature only meets every two years, and COVID-19 made it more difficult to lobby lawmakers during the off-session year of 2020.

This year, lawmakers will have to tackle “super-high priority stuff” like COVID-19, redistricting and the catastrophic Texas winter weather and power outages, Auto Body Association of Texas Executive Director Jill Tuggle said Thursday. It’ll be a “really, really tough” session, she said.

However, the trade group has been sharing consumer auto insurance complaints with lawmakers. Tuggle said legislation will require consumers and constituents — be they shops or customers — contacting legislators.

The bill was sent to the Insurance Committee on Thursday.

ABAT Vice President Eric McKenzie (Park Place Dealerships) said “I feel confident” HB 1131 would at least get a hearing this session. House Insurance Committee Chairman Tom Oliverson (R-Cypress), served as vice chairman during the 2019 hearing on HB 1348 and voted for the bill, according to McKenzie.

Vo, who co-sponsored that bill, is now the Insurance Committee’s vice chairman, which is probably another positive sign.

The 2019 hearing memorably included an appearance by John Eagle Collision plaintiff Marcia Seebachan, who testified in support of the bill. “It is unconscionable that companies can undermine this process by approving insufficient repairs,” Seebachan told the committee then.

Be heard: Texas legislator contact information can be found here and here.

Images:

The Texas Capitol is shown. (BrandonSeidel/iStock)

A Texas welcome sign is shown. (dszc/iStock)

The post Tex. bill requires OEM procedures, proof of ‘like kind and quality,’ neutral labor rate surveys appeared first on Repairer Driven News.

Funniest Cat Memes Compilation V1

#cats #Cute #Compilation
Welcome to the Meowthemall where you can find lots of cute, funny and adorable videos about Pets. If you are an animal lover, you are in the right place. Because we will bring you daily videos of cutest Pets in the world. Are you ready for that?

Ed Pacheco is running for congress: The first interview

Ed Pacheco ran for the Burrillville School Committee at the age of 19, becoming the the youngest elected official in Rhode Island history. He later represented the towns of Burrillville and Glocester as State Representative and served as the chair of the Rhode Island Democratic Party. He has devoted his non-political career to education, “first as executive director of a Rhode Island non-profit and most recently as executive director of the Rhode Island College Foundation and interim executive director of external affairs for the college.”

Pacheco is married and has two young children with his wife Claudia. He announced his candidacy for the open seat in Rhode Island’s second congressional district last week after James Langevin announced his retirement. This interview was conducted before Rhode Island General Treasurer Seth Magaziner declared his intention to run for the same seat. A statement from Pacheco appends this piece.


UpriseRI: I just watched your video on Facebook.

Ed Pacheco: What did you think?

UpriseRI: As far as making an initial overture to the public, it’s pretty good. You’ve got to get your message out there. Because of the way Representative Langevin stepped down, time and money will be tight. Potential candidates weren’t (as far as I know) collecting money for a run before January. It seems like the election might be underpowered in some ways, because no one was gearing up for a big fight on this seat.

Ed Pacheco: I think what you touched on is that the congressman’s decision caught everybody by surprise – myself included. I think the most important thing right now is to consider who can hit the ground running and put together an apparatus to be successful, not just in the primary, but more importantly, in the general election. For me that’s where the fight needs to be because whoever is elected to the United States Congress, their first vote is what is going to matter the most.

We’ve already put the team together here. We’re hitting the ground running. I’m taking a leave from my job to focus all my time and energy on this campaign and fight on behalf of Rhode Islanders throughout the second congressional district to make sure that their voices are heard in Washington.

UpriseRI: About that apparatus – You’ve got a lot of contacts in the Rhode Island Democratic Party. So in building that apparatus it seems like you have an advantage there.

Ed Pacheco: Well listen, I’ve spent my entire professional and political career in service to the state, and I’m proud of having served on behalf of Rhode Islanders. Public service to me has always come from a sense of duty.

When I first ran for office, as a high school student and as a write-in, by the way, it was a complete out of the sky type of opportunity. I remember standing in line with some friends of mine registering to vote. And someone suggested Eddie Pacheco for town council and shortly after that we had all the news stations reaching out.

I still don’t know for sure, but I think somebody’s parent overheard and called one of the news stations. Next thing I get this phone call and somebody asks, “Hey, are you running for council as a write-in candidate?” I said, “Yeah, absolutely” and we were off to the races. That was my favorite campaign. I wasn’t tied to the political establishment. I didn’t know what that was at that time. But I was a scrappy kid from Burrillville willing to fight on behalf of my classmates, my neighbors, my family, my friends – because they were there for me when I needed them in my most difficult times.

As I mentioned in my announcement yesterday I spent a number of years in need of help from my community and they were there for me. I didn’t even have to ask. I was raised by a single mom who scraped and clawed along with all of us to take care of our family in our most difficult times. We spent time on section eight and food stamps. We were fortunate to have that support then, but social programs are needed in this country now more than ever. It seems like the gaps between the haves and have nots get worse and worse by the day.

If we want to make sure the American dream is within reach for everybody, these programs have to be in place. I’m very committed to strengthening social programs in the United States and on behalf of Rhode Islanders in particular. My mother taught me the value of a good education and hard work and we certainly had the opportunity to pick ourselves up by our bootstraps – but I want to point something out. I had bootstraps. Not everybody is so fortunate. As someone who has that sense of duty to public service and was one of the youngest elected officials in the state, I know what it is to make a difference.

It’s not a cliche to me. I took that passion with me to the General Assembly fighting on behalf of my community. I went on to chair the Democratic Party and help elect Democrats throughout Rhode Island. No one is ever fully prepared to run for the United States Congress, but I’m ready. I’m ready to stand up, be counted and fight on behalf of my friends and family and neighbors who need a fighter in Washington. I’m ready to be that fighter.

UpriseRI: So let me ask you about two issues that I think Representative Langevin has taken some heat – one from the right and one from the left. From the right, he takes heat on his policies regarding guns. On the left, he takes heat because he was late to come around on the issue of abortion rights. I know you were a friend and supporter of Langevin. Where do you fall on those two issues and how do you see those issues playing out in the coming election?

Ed Pacheco: First off, I support women’s reproductive rights and any effort to codify it into the law of the land. Additionally, I support gun safety measures in this country. Let me give you two examples specific to opportunities to vote within general assembly. Number one is every time there was a proposal here in the state, I was a supporter fo reproductive rights. Two, when I was first elected to the state general assembly you might recall there was legislation introduced to remove firearms from the household in instances of domestic violence. I voted for that legislation, even representing Burriville, one of the more conservative parts of the state. I was proud to stand up for that legislation.

I think what Rhode Islanders are looking for is exactly what my supporters were looking for when I first was elected. Someone who was going to be honest and stand up and have the character to not just listen to their constituents when these issues come up, but to know when it’s time to be a statesman. Elected officials and public officials face difficult decisions and we have to be willing to listen, but we also must take the time to thoughtfully explain our positions. I’ve done that my entire life. That’s a big part of the reason why I’ve had supporters from all different parts of the political spectrum. I’ve always fought on behalf of democratic ideals and I’ll continue to do that in Congress.

UpriseRI: If Roe v. Wade is overturned, there’ll be some efforts, although it’s hard to imagine how successful those efforts might be, for Congress to step in and make it right. But that might be difficult because there’s a good chance that when you go to Congress, it’ll be Republican controlled, right? And you’ll be more or less legislating from the minority. For your first two years there’s a good chance that your legislative agenda, whatever that is, will be hamstrung. What does that look like?

Ed Pacheco: I think you hit the nail in the head. Number one, I’ve had enough experience in public service to know that it’s all about conversations and a willingness to stand up and say what needs to be said. And I’ve never been afraid to do just that. Second, as I mentioned a short time ago, that first vote is critical. I believe that if we’re going to have a chance to hold onto Congress and keep it Democratic, we need to make sure that seats like Rhode Island Congressional District Two stay blue.

But listen, you can be effective on behalf of your state and district even from the minority. I know that by working with folks in Washington and from all over the country about how important it is to make sure that Rhode Islander’s voices are heard, because, I want to reiterate, I will support any effort to codify reproductive rights. Do I think it’s going to be difficult if we’re in the minority? Absolutely. But let’s hope we don’t get there. I’m optimistic. I believe that that we will prevail – not only here in November, but across this country if we put the right candidates on the ballot. Second, in addition to these issues, I think it’s really important to bring Rhode Island issues to Washington.

We all get caught up in the buzz words and what’s easy to put out on a political pamphlet, but when we’re talking about how we ensure that people have access to good public education, good paying jobs and what that really means – we’ve got to stop just talking about these things and start putting action out there. As a Congressman, every voter in the second congressional district deserves a voice and I will make sure they have that voice in Washington.

UpriseRI: Could you give me an example of what kind of Rhode Island issues you would bring to Congress?

Ed Pacheco: Education is going to be my top priority. I am really excited to see Rhode Island operating as a leader right now with a conversation around universal pre-K across the state and some form of childcare support for Rhode Island families. Claudia and I have two beautiful children. We’re fortunate that we’ve been able to figure out how to make things work so we can go to our jobs and provide for our family. Not everyone is so fortunate. We need solutions if we’re going to break the cycle of folks constantly trying to make ends meet, put food on the table, pay the rent and keep the lights on. People are struggling.

One thing President Biden deserves a lot of credit for is the child tax credit. As a Congressman, I will fight on behalf of any effort to ensure we support families around childcare and as the next Congressman I’m going to fight for universal pre-K because every family deserves those opportunities. We can help turn this economy around – not just for Rhode Island – but for the entire United States.

UpriseRI: Let me ask you about something related to both families and healthcare, which is Medicare for All. It’s a popular idea within Democratic circles, but it doesn’t get taken seriously in Washington. I know Langevin has signed on to be in support were it to come up, and I know that’s the same for our other three delegates, but they don’t seem serious about it. Where are you on that issue and what do you think can be done about it?

Ed Pacheco: Number one, I’m a supporter of Medicare for All. I think we made tremendous efforts under President Obama to head in the right direction, but there’s certainly more work to be done. Going back to the point we just discussed about Rhode island issues, people need access to a good, high quality healthcare. People shouldn’t have to struggle with some of the decisions they have to make day in and day out. Healthcare needs to be a right in this country, just like education.

We’re honestly spoiled here in Rhode Island. All four of our federal office holders have been supporters and certainly have fought on behalf of Rhode Island, but we have to continue that. If we lose one of the four voices we’re giving in to what could be a really poor agenda that will not support the American people or Rhode Islanders in particular – especially those in the middle class and those who are aspiring to be in the middle class. Again, that will not just be something on a pamphlet, that’ll be something I stand up and vocalize on behalf of Rhode Island families, because whether you’re from Burrillville or Narragansett or Cranston or Johnston these issues matters to everyone.

UpriseRI: Let me ask you about military spending. It’s important to Rhode Island for economic reasons that we maintain military based industry, especially in the southern part of the state you’ll be representing, but it’s also true that our congressional delegation supported a military budget in excess of the one the Trump administration had asked for. Also, large military spending negatively impacts spending on social programs. We also know that if the United States military were a country, it would be something like the eighth largest contributor to climate change in the world. Curbing military spending has many positive impacts yet it seems to be politically untenable for any of our congresspeople or senators to say or do anything about this. What are your thoughts?

Ed Pacheco: It’s a good question. Look, I think in light of current events – This conversation deserves a lot more than a quick conversation. I’m not afraid to say that I need to spend more time on an issue and this is one of them. I support our military and I want to make sure that we do everything to make sure they have the proper support to be the most effective they can be on behalf of this country, but I certainly appreciate the question. It’s something I’m definitely going to look at long and hard. It deserves more attention in light of current circumstances.

UpriseRI: Moving on. Another gigantic issue in our universe is climate change. Rhode Island is warming faster than almost any other continental state. What are we doing about climate change and what should Congress be doing about climate change?

Ed Pacheco: Number one, as I mentioned in my announcement, one of the things I definitely intend to do when I get to Congress is support every and all efforts to build the blue and green economy here in Rhode Island. I want to want to celebrate for a second the work of the University of Rhode Island and in particular, the new president, Marc Parlange, for putting the blue economy back on the front burner with both the business community and the community at large. If we’re going to help address the issues our climate faces, we have to start looking at clean energy, as well as the opportunity to invest in things like turbine energy and offshore wind.

This is also an opportunity to put people to work, right? Those are jobs. We have to focus on a number of different fronts. Number one is we have to focus on good paying jobs. We have to make sure that we’re doing everything we can to combat climate change. But simultaneously, we have to think about things like tourism and recreation. This is the ocean state. We need to be doing everything we can in Washington to support the ocean state. We need to make sure that we’re bringing funding to places like URI to invest in the good work they’re doing in research on the environmental side – as well as the opportunities I mentioned that contribute to good jobs. To me that’s a given for my work as a Congressman because Rhode Island not only needs to be a part of the effort around climate change but we should be a leader given where we are geographically speaking.

UpriseRI: Where we are is pretty precarious. It’s scary.

Ed Pacheco: There are still people in Washington who have the audacity to stand up and say they don’t believe in climate change. I would ask them to turn on the news and see what’s happened over the last six months to a year. More importantly, look at the data. Data tells the story and I deal in facts. Those facts tell us that this is not something we can take lightly anymore. We need to do everything we can to support policies that are going to help not only this generation, but future generations, have a better future.

UpriseRI: I appreciate that but I’d counter that even people who acknowledge climate change in Congress aren’t doing anything about it. Big pieces of legislation are stalled in Congress. There are people who give a lot of lip service to it, but still don’t do anything.

Ed Pacheco: I’ll say it again : We’re spoiled here in Rhode Island. Because we have a delegation that fights on our behalf each and every day. Unfortunately, there’s a lot of politicians that have been elected to Congress that are more interested in the political gamesmanship than they are in actually getting the work done. I will be one of those people that will be rolling up my sleeves and getting the work done, whether it’s focused on drafting policy for folks to consider or using my soapbox to stand up voice what needs to happen on the frontline to combat climate change. I’ll join Senator Sheldon Whitehouse and his effort to make this a top priority.

UpriseRI: All right. I might be the only reporter who’s going to ask a question like this, so pardon me, if it seems untoward. In Burrillville where you were born there was an attempt to build a fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant. The battle against the plant went on for four and a half years and was ultimately successful. As this was happening in Burrillville, the town switched from basically Democrat to Republican for its representation at the State House and for its presidential votes. It’s easy to say that the change was because of Trump, but I was up there a lot during this time and talked to a lot of people. The people of Burrillville did not feel that the Rhode Island Democratic Party had their back. They felt abandoned by then-Governor Gina Raimondo and by Senator Whitehouse both of whom never took a stand against the power plant, despite their claims to care about the climate. In fact, they fully supported the power plant and never stopped advocating for it behind the scenes. So, do you think the Democratic Party in Rhode Island has truly been serving communities like Burrillville?

Ed Pacheco: I think I see what you’re getting at. It’s a good question with respect to how do we reach out to all sections of our state, right? Because the Democratic Party is a big tent. There are liberal leaning, moderate and conservative Democrats. I know as the former chair of Democratic Party chair that one of the conversations we have to be willing to have is, if we operate in absolutes, we’re not going to make any progress. I’m believe that when folks have a difference of opinion you sit down and talk with them and hope to educate and help them evolve.

People do evolve by the way. If you take the time to listen to them, they’ll take the time to listen to you. And that’s one of the things I pride in myself on in serving in the general assembly on behalf of Burrillville and Glocester, one of the more conservative parts of the state, as you mentioned. We still have work to be done and I will be the same person in Congress on behalf of the state that I was when I was in the general assembly and that I was as the head of Democratic Party.

UpriseRI: Not to belabor this point, so forgive me, but when I hear the term “big tent” it’s always used in defense of conservative policies and politicians in the Democratic Party and never in defense of “progressive” policies and politicians. Progressive voices always face an uphill battle and are often directly targeted by the party.

Ed Pacheco: Right. I think I’m going to go back to what I said to you earlier, Steve. If we can’t reach Democrats from all walks of life, Independents, and yes, maybe even some Republicans this November, we’re not going to win this seat. And for me, there’s a way to be a candidate on behalf of the entire district and ensure that all Rhode Islanders have the opportunity to succeed. As I just mentioned, part of that is taking the time to listen, sit down with folks, appreciate where they’re coming from, be honest and forthright on the issues and make sure they know they have a fighter in Washington. That’s what you can expect from me as the next Congressman for the second district.

UpriseRI: There’s a lot of tough choices coming up nationally, especially given the situation in the Ukraine. What are your thoughts on that?

Ed Pacheco: What’s playing out on the world stage right now is certainly very concerning. We all need to be paying attention to this issue because it has the potential for a ripple effect, not the least of which is the continued escalation that’s occurring. We hope that every effort is being made to deescalate the situation, and I think over the coming weeks, hopefully days, that that will be the case. We need to be supportive of our country’s effort to ensure that we are being the beacon of democracy in the world and protecting people. It is concerning. I’m paying attention along with everyone else.

UpriseRI: Is there something I should have asked that I didn’t? Is there an issue that I left on a table?

Ed Pacheco: Like I said, education is my top priority going into this race and I just want to hit home again that whether it’s universal pre-K, the child tax credit, all the way to loan forgiveness for young generations to make sure that they have the ability to succeed. When we talk about the economy here in Rhode Island and nationally there’s an entire generation out there that’s struggling to pay their bills and trying to get that job while earning a college degree. We’ve got to be smart about this and make sure that we’re not putting ourselves in a worse circumstance by missing the mark because folks find themselves in,financial difficulty and can’t get out from under that crushing debt.

Student debt is contributing to a vicious cycle that will, long term, be a detriment to our economy. I believe fundamentally that if you succeed, our community succeeds. If I succeed, our community succeeds. When you fall down, we all fall down and and we need to be there to pick one another up to make sure that we do everything we can to ensure that people have a path to prosperity, whatever that means. It’s not a cliche for me. I believe in making a difference and providing people a piece of the American dream. By going to Congress, I hope to make people’s lives just that much better.

UpriseRI: Does that include, as you mentioned, student loan debt forgiveness in a big way, not in small, incremental ways?

Ed Pacheco: I think everything we can do to help younger generations, particularly from an equity standpoint, that’s what we need to focus on.

UpriseRI: I’m hoping that we can talk again, as the election gets closer.

Ed Pacheco: Love to. I appreciate your willingness to spend some time with me this morning. And I’m excited about this campaign and excited to get to work.


Pacheco sent the following statement in response to Rhode Island General Treasurer Seth Magaziner’s declaration that he is running for the second-congressional seat:

“I welcome anyone and everyone into this race and am looking forward to a spirited debate on the values that matter to every day Rhode Islanders and who is best equipped to represent those values in Washington. As a lifelong resident of the second congressional district, a husband to a frontline healthcare worker, a father to a working family and raised by a single mother, I’ve seen firsthand the struggles Rhode Islanders are facing. I look forward to earning Rhode Islander’s support throughout the second district and ultimately their vote in the primary and going on to win in November. We need to send someone to Washington who is willing to roll up their sleeves and get to work every single day to fight for the values of working families in Rhode Island.”

The post Ed Pacheco is running for congress: The first interview appeared first on Uprise RI.

Premijeru, DOSTA‼️

Premijeru, prestanite ucjenjivati hrvatske građane! Premijeru, prestanite raditi podjele u hrvatskom društvu! Premijeru, više vam je stalo do šaputanja europskih moćnika nego do vapaja svoga naroda‼️

Tagged:

Alamo, Confederate Monuments Featured Prominently in Heated House Committee Hearing | The Texan

Generational feuds welled at the state capitol as the Culture, Recreation, and Tourism Committee of the Texas House took up an interconnected raft of bills touching on Confederate memorials and the Alamo. Though the proposals ranged from outright removal of the Confederate statues on capitol grounds to simply setting up an appeal process for decisions made by the Texas Historical Commission (THC), the natural gravity of the night’s debate pulled the conversation always back to not-quite dormant pages of Texas history. Testifiers tended to split into broad groups of defenders and critics of the state’s monuments but then fell under fainter shades of disagreement when it came to executing their plans.

Mission Indians and the Alamo

The only bill with no opposing testifiers was House Bill (HB) 1661 by state Rep. Leo Pacheco (D-San Antonio), which would grant official state recognition to the small, San Antonio-based Tap Pilam Coahuiltecan tribe.

“This bill is for the Tap Pilam Coahuiltecan Nation, [which] was previously state-recognized via resolutions: House Resolution 787 and Senate Resolution 1038 in the 77th Session. However, it was later determined that only state-recognized tribes whose recognition was recorded in statute qualified for federal benefits,” explained Pacheco, himself a Tap Pilam tribal member as well as a descendant of Canary Islanders and Mission Indians.

“Now, passage of this would make the tribe eligible for all programs, services, and other benefits provided to the state-recognized tribes in the United States.”

The Tap Pilam Coahuiltecans lived in the San Antonio missions, including the Alamo. The tribe is currently suing the City of San Antonio, the THC, the GLO, and Alamo Trust for a voice in the discussion on human remains protocols for bodies found in archaeological digs at the site.

“There was no accounting to those human remains,” said Raymond Hernandez, a Tap Pilam member recalling his grandfather, born in the 19th century, taking him to the missions around the city.

“People call them bones, but they’re our families.”

Hernandez said he has been personally involved in the “reclamation of over 200 human remains,” including a body inside the Alamo in 1995.

Ramon Vasquez, another member and frequent spokesman for the tribe, said that state recognition would give Tap Pilam the chance to consult on human remains associated with their people with state and city agencies, which could expedite the handling of inadvertent finds during digs.

Before the fate of the Alamo cenotaph was settled, the Tap Pilam had opposed the city’s plan to move the monument away from the remaining Alamo structure on the grounds that they, like the offspring of the siege defenders, considered it a funerary object akin to a headstone. The THC ultimately denied the City of San Antonio’s request to move the cenotaph.

Removing Monuments

Rep. Carl Sherman (D-Lancaster) laid out a bill that would carve a path to appeal THC decisions, though he never expressed disagreement with the cenotaph permit denial. Instead, Sherman pivoted to potentially offensive monuments and said that the THC has blocked citizens around the state hoping to see them taken down.

“The THC has refused many requests to remove, replace, or relocate specific statues and monuments. Additionally, there is no formal appeals process that allows for reconsideration,” Sherman said.

“HB 1644 would direct the THC to create that process.”

THC Executive Director Mark Wolfe testified neutrally on the bill to explain what costs would arise if it were to pass into law. According to Wolfe, the price tag on the bill comes mainly from court fees.

“We have about 17,000 markers. About 1,500 of those reference the Confederacy in some way… We very conservatively estimated perhaps one-half of one percent of our markers might be challenged in a given year. That would be 85 challenges. Assuming we could work out half of those, we would still have over 40 administrative hearings, which would be a little less than one per week,” Wolfe said, adding that legal counsel on the state’s dime would cost $150 per hour at around 18 hours per case.

“So $2,700 per case times 42 cases would be $113,400 per fiscal year just to cover the fees.”

Sherman’s bill quickly became a path to the removal of Confederate statues and the Alamo cenotaph in the eyes of both supporters and detractors who took the lectern to testify.

“We just feel like this particular bill is just kind of a back door way to skirt what the Texas Historical Commission has decided on, especially the Alamo Cenotaph,” said Brandon Burkhardt, president of This Is Texas Freedom Force (TITFF), a group that defends monuments by force of arms.

“The City of San Antonio could use something like this to skirt the will of the people… We think the process is fine the way it is, so therefore, we oppose it.”

Wielding firearms, members of TITFF have held vigils around the Alamo cenotaph, a Martin Luther King, Jr. statue in Houston, and other monuments. The group claimed credit for dispelling white nationalists from a rally around a statue of Sam Houston which they had taken up arms to defend against supposed left-wing vandals.

The group also testified against more overt proposals to remove monuments, namely a bill by Rep. Rafael Anchía (D-Dallas) to remove the Confederate statues from the capitol grounds and the Confederate portraits that hang inside the capitol. The bill would also rename the John H. Reagan building after a pair of little-known Texas abolitionists: Nathaniel Jackson and John Ferdinand Webber.

“I want to remove the monuments to the original cancel culture. The folks that wanted to cancel the United States, they wanted to cancel the Union, and they wanted to cancel black lives,” Anchía said as he introduced his bill.

“I really do believe these Confederate artifacts are a symbology of hate, racism, and oppression. They don’t glorify the soldiers. If they did, they’d glorify the Union soldiers.”

Anchía said that he would appreciate the statues if they respected all the Civil War dead and noted that Jefferson Davis, the one president of the Confederacy, was not a Texan.

Ramon Garza, San Antonio Outreach Director for TITFF, said Anchía’s proposal lacked nuance.

“Haven’t we forgotten that confederates also had a black battalion? There were black soldiers that fought on the Confederate side. Are they bad people, too? […] We even have Hispanics and Mexicans that fought on the Confederate side, also. Are we to condemn them as well?” Garza said.

“My family is Lipan Apache. If you want to talk about slavery, yes, there was slavery in Mexico, and they took them as slaves as well. But we don’t talk about that, do we?”

The Lipan Apache tribe, whose tangled history made them occasional allies of early Texians and enemies of mission Indians like the Tap Pilam Coahuiltecans, recently joined Tap Pilam in their legal fight against Alamo project leadership.

Notably, a professed descendant of one of Anchía’s proposed namesakes opposed the bill. Cindy Gaskill, a citizen who claims Jackson as her great-great-great-grandfather, suggested that the state build new monuments to abolitionists around the capitol instead of tearing old Confederate statues down.

“I’m very pleased someone is bringing recognition to the Jackson and Webber families for their contributions in freeing slaves. However, I am against HB 1186 because the bill aims to cancel the history, monuments, and art at the capitol building because the objects are related to the Confederacy,” she said.

“I would love to see monuments or memorials dedicated to both the Jackson or Webber families and other African-Americans in Texas to complement or contrast the existing works found on the capitol grounds.”

One supporter of the bill, Austin professor and member of the Texas Reconstruction Project Bryan Register, rebutted claims that removing the statues would be costly by suggesting that the state make an event out of it.

“It is suggested that taking down the monuments will cost money. It will not. You can do it as a fundraiser. There’s a lot of sledgehammers, and you can have people pay five dollars to swing one. Any red-blooded American patriot would be happy to do that,” Register said.

Chas Moore, an Austin activist with the Austin Justice Coalition, sided with Register in supporting the removal of monuments but took a softer tone on where to put them afterward.

“I disagree with the last speaker. We shouldn’t destroy any of this. I’m not for getting a sledgehammer and destroying it,” Moore said, referencing museums that have “all these amazing and gritty parts in there together” and suggesting that the statues be placed in a contextual learning environment.

“We’re missing one very key element, and it’s a human element to all of this. Imagine you come up to the capitol in the name of democracy to say your piece about whatever you want to talk about because that’s who we are as not only Americans, but Texans. And you’re always reminded by some statue or some monument that we’re idolizing people who did not want you to be part of this democratic process… I agree, these statues and these monuments themselves are not racist… But they represent a time and ideology that, if it held true today, I wouldn’t be able to even talk to you right now.”

A citizen named Paul Gescheidle, who alluded to having ancestors that fought in the Civil War, opposed the bill and fired back at Anchía and Register.

“Mr. Jefferson Davis may not have been a Texan, but Mr. Jefferson Davis was Secretary of War in the State of Texas in 1855, I believe, and he brought with him a plan… to map what is now Big Bend National Park and also what became the early parts of Route 66. So, by that same logic, should we close Big Bend? Should we rename the Jefferson Davis Mountain Range?” Gescheidle said.

“Should we change all of our maps across our state? Should we also cancel John Ireland, former governor of this state, the 18th governor I might add, and the reason why this building is made of pink granite? Is that what we should take a sledgehammer to? Should that be our fundraiser: come take five-dollar whacks at the capitol building and take down a racist monument?”

Preserving Monuments

Throughout the night, committee member Rep. Travis Clardy (R-Nacogdoches) pressed back against what one testifier called “presentism… an uncritical tendency to interpret the past in terms of modern values.” Clardy hinted that he may support Sherman’s bill but was the most vocal opponent of monument removal on the committee.

“You can’t build a tapestry this nation represents with just a few threads,” Clardy said.

“And some of them may seem oddly colored or a little strange or whatever, but woven together they weave a beautiful story, and we can’t start picking out the threads we don’t like or the whole thing comes unraveled.”

Clardy showed sympathy to a number of bills aimed at defending statues, names, and memorials, though supporters diverged on their own preferences. One bill by Rep. John Cyrier (R-Bastrop) would require local governments to get the approval of a popular vote before renaming or removing historic memorials, drawing praise from some right-leaning testifiers as a needed injection of popular will into a bureaucratic process but critique from the Republican Party of Texas.

David Wylie, representing the Texas GOP, called the bill “incremental at best.”

“Speaking on the monument priorities of the Republican Party coming from their state convention, the protection of monuments and markers and all the things of the history of Texas is of the utmost importance,” Wylie said.

“There are some other bills that we think would do a better job.”

Patterson voiced his support and foretold a rising tide of resentment towards American historical figures that could overtake more than just Confederate generals. Speaking of the Buffalo Soldier National Museum in Houston, Patterson hypothesized that they could fall to the same treatment.

“Did not the Buffalo Soldiers participate in a genocidal war against an entire race of people and enslave those people on reservations to die?” Patterson said.

“There is no one, no group, no icon from the past, that is exempt from criticism.”

6IX9INE rennt um sein Leben in New York | Schock Moment für die Fans – Alle getrollt vom Rapper!

▼Wichtige Infos zum Lesen▼
*3 Monate KOSTENLOS!
Hier zum Deal: https://amzn.to/3aP5IOP

#Rapcheck #6ix9ine
Plötzlich rennt der Rapper um sein Leben, es wirkt so als würde man ihn jagen und das man ihn schlagen will oder ähnliches. Doch am ende hat er uns alle verarscht. Zum glück ist nichts passiert.

Quellen
Selbst gedrehte Videos, Instagram oder Youtube
Thumbnail: Fotos vom Rapper aus Instagram

Mehr Videos über die ganzen Rapper findest du in dieser Playlist:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLU5MMqnqew_9cWcwrrAmNal-eEss1wVQq

Ⓒ Rap Check
Alle Angaben ohne Gewähr, Irrtümer und Änderungen vorbehalten.

►
Alle Amazon Links oder zb die mit Sternchen (*) gekennzeichneten Verweise sind sogenannte Provision-Links. Wenn du auf so einen Verweislink klickst und über diesen Link einkaufst, bekomme ich von deinem Einkauf eine Provision. Für dich verändert sich der Preis nicht.
◄

Public invited to tour archaeological dig at former Hamline-Midway home of 19th-century farm family – Twin Cities

When the Warner family left the farm behind in southern Minnesota for big city living around 1881, St. Paul was still just a community of 40,000 or so residents, but a city on the move. During the next decade, its population would triple. The Warners, too, were looking to new frontiers, both personally and politically.

By 1886, the Warners had moved into a two-story home at 830 Simpson St. bordering Hamline University, a key opportunity for Mary A. (Drake) Warner’s five daughters. Mary Warner — who had lost two sons in 1875 — became active in prison reform, women’s suffrage and the temperance movement, which would give rise to Prohibition. Her husband Jarius Rich Warner would open a store at Snelling and Englewood avenues, only to die in 1892, 25 years before his wife.

Beyond their obituaries and a newspaper ad for their lost dog, not much remains of their legacy. Trained archaeologists have nevertheless zeroed in on their backyard shed.

DISHES, GLASSWARE, BUTTONS, A DOLL FACE

Every other year since 2017, Hamline University Professor Brian Hoffman has unearthed the brick and limestone remnants of the Warner’s shed and invited his students to come help scour through the dirt for the bric-a-brac of local history.

Hunting through a dig site in what would have been the Warner’s backyard, they’ve found dishes, glassware, window glass, buttons, a doll face, marbles and a long limestone structure angled in such a way to give the possible appearance of a drainage spout. Then, by summer’s end, a backhoe refills the former Warner property, leaving a future class to repeat the exercise.

A water drainage spout? Next to a pit? Limestone is angled in a way that feels intentional, not just accidental destruction. Dishes, glassware, window glass, buttons, a doll face, marbles.. the past gives up its secrets! pic.twitter.com/G5dTttu0Am

— Frederick Melo, Reporter (@FrederickMelo) August 9, 2021

“It’s kind of micro-history,” said Hoffman, chair of Hamline University’s Department of Anthropology, while standing three feet below ground level behind East Hall and the university library. “(This is) very specific place-based history about ‘here.’ … How was this backyard used? But that’s part of a bigger question in society: How did we get to have the kinds of backyards that we have today?”

Hoffman has gone about as far as he’ll go in his search for answers to those questions, at least at this dig site. Within weeks, the sizable hole will be filled for good, probably not to be unearthed for another generation or more.

OPEN HOUSE AT SHED SITE

History buffs will get one last chance to visit the Warner’s shed in person from 3 to 6 p.m. Friday, when Hoffman and fellow archaeologist Sofía Pacheco-Forés show off key artifacts as part of an interactive discussion. Activity stations will include an opportunity for kids to draw a grid map, like the ones archaeologists use to document their findings on location.

Unlike previous open houses at the Warner’s shed, residents will not be invited to jump down into the dig site and touch history for themselves. They’ll get close enough, however, to channel it.

“This year it will just be show-and-tell,” said Hoffman, who has taught classes and coordinated summer field work related to on-campus and off-campus “backyard history” since 2004. “What we do is not just about going out and trying to make National Geographic-worthy discoveries. This is not dramatic archaeology. We feel like there’s value in having an investigation of history be about a way of connecting a community to its past.”

WHAT HAPPEN TO THE HOUSE?

Now, whatever became of the Warner house itself?

After the Warners, Sophie Solberg, a Norwegian immigrant and widower, ran the home at 830 Simpson St. as a boarding house. Her husband, who had moved to the states before her, had died before she arrived, leaving her to raise three young kids alone. She later remarried.

The property was sold to Hamline University in 1916 and served for a while as a dormitory, among other uses.

It was then relocated to 846 Simpson St. in 1946, and yes, Hoffman has tracked down one of its former tenants and had her speak to his anthropology class this summer about her memories of St. Paul in the 1940s and 1950s.

MANUELLSEN will SIE kaputt schlagen | RAPPER gründet Fußballverein | RAF CAMORA glaubt an IHN

▼Wichtige Infos zum Lesen▼
*3 Monate KOSTENLOS!
Hier zum Deal: https://amzn.to/3aP5IOP

MANUELLSEN hat immer noch damit zu kämpfen und diese Leute wollen einfach nicht mehr aufhören.
Bald könnte es knallen, wenns so weiter geht.

Quellen

Lent: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yStEgdKbFA4
Jamfm: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LN7Dk0wNUnw
Selbst gedrehte Videos, Instagram oder Youtube
Thumbnail: Fotos vom Rapper aus Instagram

Mehr Videos über die ganzen Rapper findest du in dieser Playlist:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLU5MMqnqew_9cWcwrrAmNal-eEss1wVQq

Ⓒ Rap Check
Alle Angaben ohne Gewähr, Irrtümer und Änderungen vorbehalten.

►
Alle Amazon Links oder zb die mit Sternchen (*) gekennzeichneten Verweise sind sogenannte Provision-Links. Wenn du auf so einen Verweislink klickst und über diesen Link einkaufst, bekomme ich von deinem Einkauf eine Provision. Für dich verändert sich der Preis nicht.
◄

In defiance of Governor Baker, the Legislature returns climate bill he vetoed – The Boston Globe

Baker’s veto of the original bill couldn’t be overridden because the governor rejected it after the legislative session had expired. That meant lawmakers had to approve a new bill, which Baker now has 10 days to sign, veto, or return with proposed amendments.

In a five-page letter Baker sent to the Legislature upon vetoing the bill, he said he would likely have proposed amendments to the legislation had he been given more time. It’s unclear what he will do now.

In a statement, Baker administration officials called the new bill “an opportunity to craft the best possible legislation.”

“The administration looks forward to engaging in productive discussions with lawmakers and stakeholders to ensure the bill . . . achieves climate goals in a manner that is cost-effective and equitable, and builds upon the Commonwealth’s longstanding, bipartisan leadership on climate change,” said Craig Gilvarg, a spokesman for the state Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs.

If Baker returns the bill with amendments, the Legislature can accept, reject, or further amend them.

Before voting to approve the bill Thursday, state Representative Thomas Golden, a Lowell Democrat and lead sponsor of the bill in the House, called the Legislature’s action “historic” and thanked the House speaker and Senate president for “holding the line.”

Advertisement

In addition to setting strict emissions limits statewide, which must be reviewed every five years to ensure sufficient progress, the bill establishes mandatory limits for six sectors of the economy: electric power, transportation, commercial and industrial heating and cooling, residential heating and cooling, industrial processes, and natural gas distribution and service.

The legislation also promotes environmental justice by seeking to reduce pollution in the most-affected communities; increases energy-efficiency requirements in appliances; directs the Department of Public Utilities to focus more on reducing emissions; and calls for utilities to buy an additional 2,400 megawatts of offshore wind power, raising the state total to 5,600 megawatts.

In his veto letter, Baker said he shared lawmakers’ goals but differed with them “on how these goals should best be achieved.”

“Reluctantly, I cannot sign this legislation as currently written,” he wrote.

Baker said he declined to sign the bill because it countered a recent law that seeks to promote affordable housing; lacked provisions to help fortify the state against rising seas and other impacts of climate change; would potentially harm regional efforts to procure clean energy; and was not supported by scientific analysis.

He also estimated it would cost at least $6 billion more than his administration’s plan to reduce emissions and cited the uncertain consequences of the bill on the state’s economy as it emerges from the pandemic. “As we are all learning what the future will hold, I have concerns about the impacts portions of this bill will have for large sectors of the economy,” Baker said.

Other critics, including development lobbyist NAIOP Massachusetts, the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce, and the Home Builders and Remodelers Association of Massachusetts, had also urged Baker to veto the bill.

Michael Ferrante, president of the Massachusetts Energy Marketers Association, said some provisions of the bill could be onerous for households that rely on oil to heat their homes.

“The Legislature has not recognized the heating oil industry’s ability to help the state transition to net-zero emissions through the accelerated use of renewable liquid biofuel,” he said. “Lawmakers and policy makers want to convert all heating oil customers to very expensive and ineffective electric heat pumps. This will be especially damaging to low-income households.”

But state lawmakers and environmental advocates said criticism of the bill was shortsighted.

“We can work with the executive branch to address technical changes,” said state Senator Marc R. Pacheco, who chairs the committee on global warming and climate change. “But there’s simply no time to waste.”

Environmental advocates praised lawmakers for their swift response to Baker’s veto and said they will expect a similar response if he rejects the new bill.

“Last session’s climate bill is an important step toward a cleaner, safer future, but we need to go further,” said Ben Hellerstein, state director of Environment Massachusetts. “Let’s clear the decks of last session’s business by passing this bill into law. And then let’s turn our attention to the other important climate policies awaiting action.”

Deb Markowitz, state director of The Nature Conservancy in Massachusetts, called the legislation “one of the boldest climate bills in the United States.”

“The state now has the driving force of accountability and targets by which to measure progress,” she said. “It’s the momentum we need in this defining decade.”

David Abel can be reached at [email protected]. Follow him on Twitter @davabel.

« Previous Page — Next Page »