By Elias Miller
Boston University News Service Americans belonging to a church are in the minority for the first time since Gallup started polling church membership nearly a century ago, according to their research released on March 29. In 2020, 47% of American adults polled said they belonged to a church, including synagogues and mosques. While the numbers have been trending down since the beginning of the decade, these are the lowest figures yet, according to Gallup. In 2018, church membership in the U.S. was at 50%, down from 70% in 2000. Until then, that figure had been largely stagnating around 71% since 1940. COVID-19 regulations and the move to online could potentially wallop church attendance rates further. With widespread lockdowns, many places of worship also had to switch to conducting services via video-conferencing services, potentially accelerating the declining trend in membership. “Like all churches, I think we’ve been kind of on a slow decline, year by year, for a number of years. But we’re still a pretty healthy church,” Pennsylvania-based Rev. Jeffrey Packard told the Centre Daily Times in December. “But honestly, I am not lying to myself or anyone else. I don’t really expect us to grow.” Throughout the pandemic, the share of Americans who physically attend religious services has been inching toward normalcy. The number of regular church-goers who said they attended religious services in person in the past month increased from 33% in July to 42% in March, according to Pew research data published March 22. In that same time frame, those polled who said they watched services remotely dropped from 72% to roughly two-thirds. Gallup polled churchgoers on how they perceived the safety of in-person religious services during the pandemic. Three-quarters of religious attendees said they were at least somewhat confident that they could safely check into in-person services, a more than 10-point rise from last summer. Religious affiliation is different from church membership — those who identify with an organized religion still form a vast majority in the United States, yet their rates are also at record lows. Like church attendance, religious affiliation is on a decline precipitated by younger generations, according to Gallup’s polls. Only 36% of millennials in 2018 to 2020 said they belonged to a church. That is in stark contrast to 50% of the previous generation and 58% of baby boomers in the same two-year time frame, according to Gallup. The polling outfit could not gather as accurate data on Generation Z, as the proportion of adults in Gen Z is limited. But, summary data based on those who had reached adulthood show rates similar to Millenials. “[T]he decline in religious affiliation … means that a smaller proportion of each subsequent generation is raising kids in religious homes,” Christel J. Manning, a professor and author in religion, said in Pacific Standard. “And those who do retain religion will often use a kind of ‘religion-lite’ approach, attending services sporadically and celebrating holidays as cultural events devoid of much of their original meaning.” Compared with the two-year period of 1998-2000, before the plummeting rates, boomers dropped nine points in church membership from 67%. Generation X followed a steeper decline: 12 points down from 62% in 20 years. Manning said that the generation decline in religious affiliation, most recently shown in Generation Z, is not a show of opposition to religion but rather indifference to it. For many, religion does not occupy the preponderant role in their lives that it had for previous generations. She also argues that an expansion in diversity also contributes to the downward shift. “Exposure to diverse perspectives challenges the claims of any particular worldview, which is why people in multicultural, cosmopolitan societies tend to be less religious,” Manning said in Pacific Standard. Generation Z is more racially and ethnically diverse. In 2018, for the first time, non-Hispanic White U.S. residents made up less than half of the population under 15 years of age, according to a Brookings Institution analysis of U.S. Census estimates. Young people are connecting with peers who with different backgrounds much more. This versatility often leaves a dent in young people’s connection to their family’s religion. Gen Z is also famously known as the generation to have never lived in a world without instant access to the internet. The internet provides a forum for encountering alternative or conflicting religious views or views that promote a departure from religion. Still, more than three-quarters of Americans adhered to an organized religion in 2018. While this is down from 90% at the turn of the century, it represents a strong supermajority of the U.S. adult population who have a religious affiliation. More religious Americans say their faith has been strengthened by the pandemic rather than weakened, according to early polling by Pew research. Twenty-three percent of adults told pollsters their beliefs had grown stronger since the first declared case of the coronavirus in the United States, compared to just 4% who said theirs had grown weaker. A slim majority said it did not strongly change. By Elias Miller Boston University News Service Close to 40,000 baseball fans swarmed Globe Life Park in Arlington, Texas, in the first week of April. During the same time nationwide, many governors have eased restrictions previously put in place to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. By contrast, major parts of Europe are reinstating restrictions as cases increase again. France and some of its neighbors are back in lockdown. Europe is seeing a third wave of spiking COVID-19 cases. German Chancellor Angela Merkel on March 22 called the deadlier U.K. variant of the coronavirus “a new pandemic” of its own. Only a few months ago, the roles were reversed. Throughout summer and for much of winter, the European continent fared better than the U.S. in controlling its coronavirus caseloads. Some medical experts in America called on state governors and federal leadership to impose strict lockdowns at the federal level, modeled after these European nations. Those calls were overwhelmingly rejected by elected officials. But the onset of coronavirus vaccines has reversed the gap between the two regions, with the United States vaccination rate exceeding that of Europe as the European Union continues to struggle with delays in distribution.
Vaccinations began in the United States in mid-December shortly after the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cleared the Pfizer–BioNTech vaccination for public use, making it the first of three vaccines used in the U.S. While cases have been rising over the past 12 days, this newest development follows 10 weeks of steadily declining COVID-19 cases. Average new cases decreased 75.2% from the highest peak on Jan. 11, 2021, according to the CDC. The World Health Organization designated Europe as the global active epicenter of the pandemic on March 13. General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director of WHO, said more cases were being reported in Europe every day than were reported in China at the height of its epidemic, just over one year since the WHO declared COVID-19 a pandemic. As of April 6, 19% of the U.S. population was fully vaccinated, according to the CDC. Comparatively, in Germany and France, the vaccinated population only comprises around 5% in each, according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University. The U.K. vaccination rate is ahead of both its E.U. neighbors and the United States. Forty-seven percent of Brits have received at least one dose, compared to just 13% in the European Union and 32% in the United States, according to data compiled by Our World in Data. The E.U.’s labored rollout was put in further disarray when several major European nations, including Germany, France, Italy, and Spain, suspended using the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine in early March. The suspension was prompted by four cases of blood clot-related complications out of a million total administered doses. Prosecutors in Italy seized close to 400,000 doses of the vaccine on March 15 after opening a criminal investigation intended to determine whether a teacher’s death following his vaccination was caused by it. After regulators cleared the vaccine, many of the same countries resumed the AstraZeneca rollout, and politicians did what they could to re-inspire confidence in the vaccine. French Prime Minister Jean Castex took the first AstraZeneca shot, as did France’s Health Minister Olivier Véran. The AstraZeneca vaccine is not an authorized vaccine for use in the United States. When major E.U. countries decided to halt AstraZeneca doses, they were already lagging far behind Americans and the U.K. The Johnson & Johnson vaccine was called for a halt in administration by the FDA and CDC in early April. Like the AstraZeneca vaccine, there were concerns about the vaccine causing blood clots. So far, six out of the nearly seven million people who received the Johnson & Johnson vaccine have experienced these effects. Jeff Zients, the White House COVID-19 Response Coordinator, said the pause will not have a significant impact on U.S. vaccine plans because, the “vaccine makes up less than five percent of the recorded shots in arms in the United States to date.” In mid-December, Belgian budget state secretary Eva De Bleeker accidentally tweeted the prices the E.U. had negotiated with pharmaceutical companies for vaccines. The accident exposed that the E.U. seemingly focused on getting a better deal for its budget, resulting in a lower price per dose. This came at the cost of further delays. For instance, Brussels pays 24% less than Washington per each dose of the Pfizer vaccine and 15% less for Johnson & Johnson, according to the now-deleted Belgian document and an analysis conducted by Bernstein Research. The United States took a more active role than their European counterparts in funding and supporting their drugmakers’ production in other ways, like awarding billions in subsidies and granting them an intellectual property shield on their vaccines. The FDA also worked quicker than its European equivalent in fast-tracking its approvals system. “The U.S. and the U.K. locked in their supplies before they knew the vaccine was going to work. The E.U. was more risk-averse,” Lawrence Gostin, a Georgetown University professor of global health law, said in an interview with The Atlantic in February. These delays are likely best explained by the E.U.’s handling of the vaccination effort as a unified bloc of its member states. Contracts with pharmaceutical companies were negotiated as a bloc, and rollouts were determined collectively. This joint effort benefited the smaller nation states who are more than likely receiving greater supplies of doses than they could have negotiated as individual states. The E.U.’s wealthiest leaders like Germany and France, however, face heated criticism at home for falling short of what they could have accomplished with their own national budgets. The joint effort can be seen as a correction of an earlier attitude of every-nation-for-itself. More than a year ago, Italian officials pleaded with their European neighbors for protective supplies like masks, gloves and disposable gowns. The German and French governments blocked exports of their own personal protective equipment at a time when Italy was rocked with one of the highest caseloads in the world. The E.U. is planning to vaccinate 70% of its adults by the end of summer, a target that is not assured. Beyond the delays, the full impact of possible variants is yet to be comprehensively observed. As for the U.S., President Biden predicts all Americans will be eligible to get a vaccine by April 19.
By Elias Miller
Boston University News Service As health professionals brace for a new surge brought on by deadlier coronavirus variants, Massachusetts moved into Phase 4 of its reopening plan on Monday. Stadiums, arenas and ballparks can now reopen at 12% of their full capacity, provided they first send the Department of Public Health a plan of the safety precautions they intend to take. TD Garden will arrange fans in seating pods, each at least six feet apart, according to the stadium’s website. Fenway Park, which had until recently served as a mass vaccination site, should be able to welcome roughly 4,500 fans in time for Opening Day on Thursday, April 1. Public events can now hold up to 100 people indoors and 150 people outdoors, but limits on personal gatherings remain unchanged, with a maximum of 25 people allowed in private backyards and no more than ten people inside private residences. At restaurants, patrons may only be seated at a table for 90 minutes or less. All customers must wear masks at all times, unless they are actively eating or drinking, according to the state’s website. Seated parties — limited to six people — must also be at least six feet away. Self-serve areas like buffet tables are still prohibited. Before leaving office on Monday, former Mayor Marty Walsh announced Boston would be moving into a “modified” fourth phase, limiting public gatherings to 60 people indoors and 100 people outdoors. “The City of Boston will not advance beyond the reopening steps outlined today until the citywide testing positivity rate stays below 2.75 percent, as calculated by the Boston Public Health Commission, for two consecutive weeks,” the mayor’s office said in a statement. The latest positivity rate reported by the BPHC was 3.4% as of the week of March 8. Meanwhile, officials in Cambridge announced the city would be staying in Phase III, Step 2 “until further notice.” “The city’s conservative approach to its phased reopening balances our efforts to minimize the public health impacts of COVID-19 with providing vital support to our residents and local business,” Cambridge City Manager Louis A. DePasquale said in a statement. DePasquale added that the city would reassess its status as it analyzes future data. Public gatherings in Cambridge are still limited to 50 people indoors and 100 outdoors. Community events sponsored by the city or taking place in its parks will remain restricted for the foreseeable future. This week, Baker also downgraded the state’s travel order to a simple advisory: those traveling from out-of-state are now encouraged — not required — to quarantine for 10 days. Exempt from the advisory are those who are fully vaccinated and asymptomatic, have received a negative test within 72 hours of their arrival or were outside state lines for fewer than 24 hours. Previously, a failure to comply with the order carried a $500 fine each day the traveler was found in violation. The number of confirmed cases in the state has seen an 8% increase in the past 14 days, while deaths in that same period are trending downward by 21%, according to state and county reports tallied by NBC News. Most states around the country have seen decreases in the same period. COVID-19 restrictions across the United States have largely eased. In all but seven states, businesses are mostly open, and there are no mask restrictions in 15 states, according to a New York Times tally. But epidemiologists warn that the B.1.1.7 variant of the virus, often referred to as the UK variant, may bring about a further fork in the road to recovery. On March 19, Eric Feigl-Ding, an epidemiologist and health economist of the Federation of American Scientists, tweeted about a potential fourth wave wrought by this variant:
B.1.1.7 is also deadlier. It poses a 61% higher risk of 28-day mortality, according to a March 15 study by the scientific journal, Nature, compared to the original virus.
“Almost every epidemiologist agrees a 4th surge is coming,” Feigl-Ding tweeted. “It is almost inevitable. The only question is how bad will it be. Maybe [it will not be] that bad if we vaccinate faster.” By Elias Miller
Boston University News Service Investigators appointed by New York’s state attorney general interviewed former gubernatorial aide Charlotte Bennett on Monday, a key witness in the allegations of sexual harassment against New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo. Over the course of four hours, they reviewed more than 100 pages of Bennett’s allegations. Soon after, Debra Katz, Bennett’s lawyer, released a statement on Monday with a new detail of Cuomo’s alleged harassment. “One piece of new information that came to light today was the Governor’s preoccupation with his hand size and what the large size of his hands indicated to Charlotte and other members of his staff,” Katz wrote. Katz provided no update on the investigation’s duration or its next steps, but said investigators were “moving quickly” to get the facts. Bennett’s allegations are the latest in a litany of sexually motivated double-entendre charges she levied against the governor. In late February, she told the New York Times that Cuomo asked her about her sex life, including whether she ever strayed from monogamy in her relationships or if she had ever slept with older men. Five women have made similar allegations against the governor over the past three months. Cuomo apologized for some of his actions in an early-March press conference. He said he regretted such “playful” jokes and recognized his actions made people feel uncomfortable. However, he denied more serious allegations bordering on assault. “I now understand that I acted in a way that made people feel uncomfortable,” Cuomo said. “It was unintentional and I truly and deeply apologize for it.” On Monday, State Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie told reporters that his chamber was in the process of hiring a law firm to help conduct their impeachment investigation of the governor, launched March 11. The state’s sexual harassment investigation into the governor’s alleged actions was announced on Feb. 28 by New York Attorney General Letitia James. She holds an elected position and therefore can’t be fired by the governor. A majority of the state’s lawmakers have called on Cuomo to resign or be removed, according to a running tally by Intelligencer. In addition, more than more than 20 out of the delegation’s 27 total U.S. representatives and both U.S. senators from New York have called on Cuomo to resign over the past month. Both the New York State Assembly and State Senate have a Democratic majority. A Siena College poll released Monday found 50% of New Yorkers believed Cuomo should not resign; on the other hand, nearly two-thirds of New Yorkers said he should. On a March 12 call with reporters, Cuomo criticized the “cancel culture” over his critic’s rush to remove him, saying they should “wait for the facts.” In her statement, Katz said the investigation will show Bennett’s allegations against the governor are true. “We remain confident that their investigation will substantiate Charlotte’s claims of sexual harassment against Gov. Cuomo, as well as the failure of his senior staff to meet their mandatory reporting requirements under the very laws he signed,” Katz wrote. By Jenifer B. McKim
Nearly 10 years ago, Wilfred Dacier was told he would be a free man. But for Dacier, now 63, his view continued to be a little corner of the town of Gardner that changed only with the seasons. The positive vote he received from the Massachusetts Parole Board in 2010 did not result in his release from the North Central Correctional Institution. That’s nominally because Dacier has been diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder, and the parole board made his release conditional upon him moving to a secure facility run by the state Department of Mental Health, which repeatedly declined to give him housing. But Dacier’s incarceration for nearly a decade after being granted parole offers us Exhibit A of why many say the Massachusetts Parole Board is ripe for reform. Consider the reason why mental health officials did not take Dacier: After examining him, they found in 2011 that his condition did not warrant being housed in a secure facility. That would seem to be good news for Dacier and for Massachusetts taxpayers, who pay for our prisons. The parole board, though, rescinded its decision to grant Dacier parole, worried about where he could go. Board members then refused to relent for years, despite a 2015 report from a psychologist, appointed by the board, that found Dacier could gradually transition to the community without the support of the Department of Mental Health. Frustrated, Dacier took his case to the Suffolk County Superior Court, where a judge in September 2019 found the board had penalized him because of his mental illness — finally prompting change. That Dacier remained in prison at all after being granted parole, let alone for most of a decade, is “crazy,” says Joel Thompson, a managing attorney at the Harvard Prison Legal Assistance Project at Harvard Law School, who represents Dacier. “In 2010 you paroled him, and the only thing he has messed up since then is failing to get DMH to take him. Why aren’t we just hashing out a release plan together?” Dacier’s situation is not unusual, say prisoners’ rights advocates, citing both the parole board’s treatment of mentally ill prisoners and long delays in making decisions and releasing people to the community. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in 2017 ruled in favor of another inmate claiming he was being discriminated against because of his disability. Similar allegations are under investigation by the U.S. attorney’s office, according to interviews and documents obtained by the WGBH News Center for Investigative Reporting. The U.S. attorney’s office says it can neither confirm nor deny whether an investigation is taking place. But James Pingeon, an attorney with Boston-based Prisoners’ Legal Services of Massachusetts, says disability law attorneys have received questions from federal investigators about the inquiry — an effort he supports — as recently as this spring. “There has been a longstanding problem with the treatment of persons with mental illness by the parole board,” Pingeon said. “It’s not acceptable to hold someone in prison because you don’t want to provide them with the necessary support and services in the community.” By Marilyn Schairer
Originally published on WGBH News Surgical masks are in short supply at Massachusetts pharmacies as customers cleared them from store shelves in response to the coronavirus that many fear is spreading to the U.S. from its point of origin in Wuhan, China. “I’ve gotten phone calls of people who want to buy them,” Gail Bray, a cashier at Gary Drug on Beacon Hill, said. “I tell them there may be 10-20 in the box, so they buy a box and share with their friends, so they’re sharing it, they’re not just hoarding it.” Bray attributed the uptick in sales to the virus outbreak, despite no cases near Boston. “Sometimes that does happen when there's a panic going,” Bray said. National drug store chains, such as CVS Pharmacy — headquartered in Woonsocket, Rhode Island — have not been immune to the sweep either, with spokeswoman Stephanie Cunha confirming the demand shortages to WGBH News, saying they expect to “re-supply those stores as quickly as possible.” Health officials from the state and the City of Boston said that wearing a surgical mask is one of the best defenses against the virus during a press conference Monday afternoon where they announced that no cases had yet appeared in Massachusetts since the outbreak began. Elias Miller contributed to this report. By George Abunaw and Elias Miller Caitlyn Sullivan of Needham wants to help students at her high school stop vaping.
The 16-year-old junior says she worried about her friends’ health. That’s why she joined a group of students at Needham High School who are aiming to create awareness of the dangers of vaping. The group, Students Advocating Life without Substance Abuse, held multiple events at the high school last week, including distributing maroon wristbands that read “Take Care of Yourself” and promoting class discussions about vaping. “Teenagers think they are invincible,” Sullivan said. “They know the bad effects, but they are choosing to ignore them.” The effort came the same week that Gov. Charlie Baker lifted a temporary ban on the sale of vapes and state health regulators released a new set of restrictions on what consumers can buy. Convenience stores and gas stations can now only sell unflavored vapes with lower nicotine levels. E-cigarette products with higher degrees of nicotine content can only be legally sold at licensed tobacco stores. The sale of flavored vapes is restricted to licensed smoking bars, where patrons will need to stay onsite for their consumption. Baker had declared a public health emergency in September following reports of severe lung disease linked to the use of e-cigarettes and marijuana vaping products. He called for a four-month ban on the sale of flavored and unflavored vaping products Some students say the ban did little to stop use of e-cigarettes and they want to be part of the solution. Sullivan says the temporary ban was actually harmful to students: “It’s forcing students to buy rip-off products, which are even worse for them, and can be laced.” She added that, with no flavored pods available for purchase, other students turned to combustible cigarettes, and even marijuana. “Even if it’s not safe, they'll still get their hands on it, just because they want to — or they need to, if they're addicted,” Sullivan said. Efforts are growing as students are seeing an increasing number of their peers vaping despite news of health dangers. At Lexington High School, a group of 20 to 30 students are being trained on the latest research about e-cigarettes to then speak to their peers from middle schools to the public high school, said prevention coordinator Julie Fenn. The student leaders came up with the slogan “LexENDS vaping,” playing on the acronym ENDS — electronic nicotine delivery system — to bring awareness to the e-cigarette epidemic. “We find that peer-to-peer education is really effective,” Fenn said, adding students would rather listen to each other than “some old lady like me.” Senior Jake Venzke-Kodo, 18, said he was asked to join the Lexington group following his success running an Instagram page where he posted anti-vaping related memes. Now he is a key member, tasked with coming up with effective ideas to help his classmates stop vaping. He says he’s seen too many of his friends become addicted. “In the bathrooms, there was always a student vaping or Juuling,” said Venzke-Kodo. “I knew I had to at least try and do something to help.” Venzke-Kodo says it’s important for younger students to hear from their older peers. “In health classes, it's just an adult telling you statistics, which is not as relatable as someone the same age as you or even just a little bit older talking to you,” he said. “I have had a lot of success talking to freshmen, and they respect when they are approached by older members of the school.” An October survey with the University of Michigan’s Monitoring the Future found that, since 2017, the shares of secondary students who regularly vape “has roughly doubled.” Close to 30% of polled 12th graders said they had vaped within the past 30 days. Though that number decreases the lower the high school grade, even some 10% of eighth graders report having picked up a Juul or other vaping device in the past 30 days, according to the survey. In spite of their growing popularity, younger users often don’t understand health effects of vaping. A September poll conducted by the American Society of Clinical Oncology found that close to 30% of people age 18 to 38 years old believed flavored e-cigarettes to be less harmful than non-flavored ones, despite this being false. Among Generation Z adults aged 18 to 22, 20% found e-cigarettes to be harmless. The Needham chapter of Students Advocating Life without Substance Abuse was founded eight years ago by students wishing there were more practical help given to those who are pressured into engaging into alcohol or other drugs. Working with school administrators, they also reached out to state Department of Public Health for support in their initiatives. With the increased prominence of e-cigarette use among the student body, the group decided to start focusing on vaping prevention. Karen Mullen, the advisor for the Needham High School Students Advocating Life without Substance Abuse, applauded their efforts. “The students are passionate about this subject and have very personal reasons they advocate for their peers’ health,” she said. “They are especially interested in getting help for those who want to quit and cannot do so.” On Friday, the student group set up two tables in the cafeteria to culminate a week-long campaign to talk about the dangers of vaping. By the main entrance, they offered a raffle, encouraging peers to sign up for updates to prevention efforts in exchange for a chance to win $10 off at Dunkin' Donuts or at a local burrito restaurant. At the other table, they laid out a large, white banner, with “Take Care of Yourself” written at the top in red lettering. By noon, close to four dozen names adorned the banner meant to symbolize the students’ and teachers’ pledge not to vape. Sullivan says she realizes she can’t make other students change their behavior, but she hopes she can help them learn about the dangers of what they are doing. “Maybe it will maybe spark like five or even one student to come forward,’’ she said. “That would be a success to us, or at least to me, if one student comes forward and asks for help.” George Abunaw and Elias Miller are student journalists at Boston University College of Communication. Correction: A previous version of this article incorrectly stated Karen Mullen's title. She is in fact the advisor for the Needham High School Students Advocating Life without Substance Abuse. By Elias Miller
BU News Service BOSTON — Alejandra St. Guillen wants to bring institutional change to the issues of gun violence, income inequality and mass incarceration. Julia Mejia wants to address poverty on as many levels in the city as possible. In a city where one in five residents are Hispanic or Latino, both Guillen and Mejia are hoping to be the first Latina councilor in Boston’s City Council history. The 13-member council has not had a Latino member since Felix G. Arroyo left office in 2013. In the September preliminary vote, St. Guillen finished in fourth and Mejia followed in fifth place, meaning it’s likely one or both of them has a shot at winning one of the four At-Large seats in the Nov. 5 municipal election. St. Guillen, 42, was born and raised in Mission Hill. She attended Boston Latin Academy and graduated in 1999 from Wesleyan University in Connecticut as an Economics and African American Studies double major. She holds a master’s degree in education from the City College of New York. In 2014, Mayor Martin Walsh appointed St. Guillen to direct the Office of Immigrant Advancement. She left in December to focus on her campaign. During her time with the Office for Immigrant Advancement, St. Guillen helped create the Greater Boston Immigrant Defense Fund, a funding collaborative intended to benefit the Greater Boston area’s immigrant and refugee communities. “A lot of immigrant families are mixed status,” St. Guillen said. “It might be a household where the parents are undocumented, or the dad is undocumented and the kids are U.S. citizens, but the fear is the same. The kids are going to observe that fear, internalize it and suffer because of it.” Earlier this month, St. Guillen said the office’s outreach has been positive, and praises Boston’s position as a sanctuary city for immigrants. Even so, she would rather see less cooperation between Boston’s police force and the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. “The police are there to protect and to serve,” she said. “They’re not there to enforce immigration policy.” Earlier this month, documents obtained by WBUR Public Radio unearthed emails showing regular communication and partnership between ICE and the Boston police. St. Guillen said she would favor increased scrutiny toward how the two work hand-in-hand. “I think that really digging deep into how school police reports get in the hands of ICE and making sure there is a clear wall there would do a lot to alleviate the fear, and the perpetuation of the school-to-deportation pipeline.” Such reforms, in her view, must come from a clear separation from federal immigration enforcement and local policing. “Is public safety compromised if there is not information sharing between ICE and BPD? I think no.” Mejia, 49, is a community organizer born in the Dominican Republic. At the age of five, she came to the U.S. with her mother, who entered the country on a visa that then expired, rendering Mejia’s mother an undocumented immigrant. Mejia would like to see better results from the city’s Office of Immigrant Advancement. “I look at parents who are undocumented and are afraid to call the school to figure out a grade, a test score or whatever the case is. We haven’t created a space where people feel safe,” she said. Both candidates said they were inspired to run by the election of President Donald Trump. “It’s been a terrible, terrible impact,” said St. Guillen of Trump’s election. “Crime reporting is down and domestic violence reporting is down. Medical appointments are down. There’s just so much uncertainty that people would rather not take the risk.” She echoes concerns faced by people under Temporary Protected Status, temporary rights to residency afforded to some immigrants fleeing armed conflict or natural disaster. “Trump will put something forward, it’ll get challenged, so they’re in this limbo.” Mejia points to election night 2016 as a turning point in her decision to run for public office. “I was afraid to wake my daughter. She was six at the time. I told her the news and she asked, ‘are you going to have to leave the country?’” she said. “My mom and I both became U.S. citizens. So no one’s taking us out. We’re good.” Another driving factor for her was then-At-Large Councilor Ayanna Pressley’s election to the U.S. House. Among others, Pressley has endorsed both St. Guillen and Mejia for the Boston City Council, notably over her former colleague Mike Flaherty and successor Althea Garrison. Horace Small, founder and executive director of Boston’s Union of Minority Neighborhoods, said both of them have “a serious shot.” He expects a vacancy to be left by one of the current city councilors. “I don’t think Althea Garrison will be back,” he said. In September, both St. Guillen and Mejia garnered more votes than Garrison, who in January was sworn into the council as Rep. Ayanna Pressley’s replacement. By the city’s rules, once Pressley left the council to be sworn into the U.S. House of Representatives, her seat went to the nearest runner-up in the 2017 municipal election: that year, Garrison placed a distant fifth. “Horace’s evaluation is just a bit biased. Councilor Garrison is working very hard in this campaign and will not go down without a fight,” Garrison’s chief of staff Mark Murphy said in a response. Murphy compared Garrison to Donald Trump, who many in Massachusetts felt would be a distant runner up to Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election. Garrison is the only self-identified conservative on the city council, after registering as Republican, Democrat and Independent several times since 1982. She has recently been a very vocal supporter of the president. “I would be willing to bet that Horace also thought that Hillary Clinton would easily beat Donald Trump in 2016 and was ‘shocked’ that Clinton didn’t win so easily,” added Murphy. “Polls and a very simplistic liberal analysis like Horace’s do not speak for the silent majority of the people, even in Boston.” For Small, a significant difference between the two Latina candidates relates to their political experience and public background. “One has worked her whole career in government on the inside,” he says. “And then you have this other sister, Julia, who’s been an organizer all her life — and she’s used to working in the community. She’s the ultimate outsider.” Meija says there is no competition between her and St. Guillen. “You have four votes. When four white men run, nobody says anything. What makes you think you have to choose between one and the other?” By Elias Miller
BU News Service CNN’s Chief White House correspondent discussed his theories on impeachment with a packed audience Tuesday night, and touched upon his time in what he called the “press cage” while covering President Donald Trump’s administration. Jim Acosta, famously singled-out by Trump’s administration for his coverage of the president, said the president has, “to a large extent, put himself in this situation” by showing animosity toward the press and breaking previous norms of presidency. He cited the challenges of doing his job, such as diminishing press briefings, in a context of rising tensions towards journalists. Acosta’s forum, though planned in advance, coincidentally took place within the context of the Trump-Ukraine scandal, with news of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s impeachment inquiry into President Trump breaking exactly a week prior. “There’s a lot of twists and turns between now and when the House takes the vote, if they do decide to take a vote,” Acosta said. “It does feel like it’s been leading up to this.” The forum was moderated by CNN Political Commentator and Harvard Institute of Politics Resident Fellow Alice Stewart at the Harvard Kennedy School. Acosta told Stewart he believed there has been a shift in the president’s approval rating after the inquiry began. “When the president of the United States gets on a phone call with a foreign leader, and that foreign leader is talking about how he really wants to get his hands on some military assistance so he can fight the Russians, and then the president says, ‘Can you do us a favor, though?’” Acosta said. “I think that that is a very serious matter.” CNN’s polling showed that 41% of Americans supported impeaching and removing President Trump in May of this year, though late September polling by CNN showed an updated 47% of Americans supporting the removal from office of the commander-in-chief. Though his reporting has spanned four presidential campaigns on top of state and local politics, Acosta claimed he has never witnessed hostility comparable to that of Trump rallies. “People would come up to our press area—we called it the ‘press cage’—and shout ‘traitor’ in our face,” Acosta said, recounting times when he and his colleagues feared for their safety. This hostility has not improved with time, he said. In the president’s course from candidate to commander-in-chief, Acosta notes that President Trump has escalated the intensity of his rhetoric. While campaigning, then-candidate Donald Trump would call CNN and their colleagues the “dishonest news media.” Since taking office, he has switched to “the enemy of the people.” While Acosta understands that some may dismiss Trump’s attacks on the press as simple “trolling,” he points out that, among Trump supporters, “not everybody is in on the act.” Acosta referenced the recent conviction of Cesar Sayoc, who mailed pipe bombs to prominent Democratic Party politicians in October 2018 and routinely harassed Acosta with death threats and a picture of a decapitated goat’s head up until Sayoc’s arrest. Sayoc was sentenced to 20 years in prison. Acosta also recounted good experiences with supporters at Trump rallies, cautioning the audience at the John F. Kennedy Jr. Forum not to demonize the president’s base as a whole or characterize them all in the same manner. Some supporters, he said, came up to him after rallies had ended to apologize for their candidate’s behavior. One Trump supporter had personally thanked Acosta for lending a chair to his mother. To the cameras, viewers could clearly hear packed audiences yelling out “Fake News” and “CNN Sucks” at the journalists’ press risers. Privately, on the other hand, several walked up to Acosta after the rallies wrapped up to disavow Trump’s attacks to the press. Because of his own background, Acosta said he relates to many Trump supporters. “I grew up in a blue-collar home, my parents split up when I was five years old, my mother worked in restaurants her whole life, my father worked in supermarkets his whole life,” he said. “I was raised by a single mother; I am hardly part of the media elite.” Acosta said he doesn’t view Trump supporters as monolithic, or even longtime Republicans. “A lot of them look like Democrats to me,” he added. “When I go to the president’s rallies, a lot of them are disaffected Bernie Sanders supporters, a lot are folks from the labor movement who have given up on the Democratic party,” Acosta said. “They’re certainly drawn to what Trump is talking about.” By Elias Miller
On Sunday, 19 candidates running for the Boston City Council congregated within Roxbury Community College in a home-stretch effort to turn out the vote to Tuesday’s preliminary municipal election. This dense field of candidates owes its size partly to the open primaries erupting in the wake of outgoing Councilors Timothy McCarthy, Josh Zakim and Mark Ciommo, of districts 5, 8 and 9, respectively. In addition, Rep. Ayanna Pressley’s 2018 ascent from city council to U.S. House in an upset primary against incumbent Michael Capuano helped frame Boston’s city government as a possible bridge to greater political prestige. This year, those foreign to the city council ran to fill those open seats, but also presented a direct challenge to incumbents—as did candidates Brandon Bowser, Liz Breadon and Jonathan Allen, who announced their run prior to Allston-Brighton’s Ciommo announcement not to seek reelection. As always, candidates also rushed to fill the scrum of the at-large race, of which four councilors are chosen to represent the entirety of Boston. Fifteen candidates—of those, only three white men—registered their bid to occupy a position still filled by Pressley, just a year ago. Jonathan Allen, running to be Allston-Brighton’s district councilor, is a fresh graduate from Boston University’s School of Law, whose lack of representation in its student body factored into his decision to run for office. “As one of four black men in my incoming class out of 250 students at BU Law, when I first came in as a 1L, I was looking around saying, ‘Where are the people of color? Why don’t you think that we deserve to be here too?’” remembered Allen. One of the crosshairs of the 2019 campaign had to do with immigration, with several candidates running on policies of advancing Boston’s sanctuary city status and promoting a clear opposition to President Trump’s immigration measures. In her speech promoting voter turnout for Tuesday’s election, Rep. Pressley opined the importance of electing state and local leaders to stand “in affront to the draconian, oppressive, life-threatening, family-separating policies that are being rolled out, it seems, by the hour”. A speech that echoed with Alejandra St. Guillen, running at-large: “In terms of our sanctuary city status, we definitely need to be stronger about what that means and implement policies that reflect that status. When we’re talking about cooperation between ICE and the Boston Police Department, we need to limit that significantly.” Others still, in the bastion of first-time campaigns, expressed discontent with the current state of the city government. Priscilla Flint-Banks, running at-large, said of the current makeup, “some of them are complacent. They’re not doing what they should be doing.” Pressed for specifics, Flint-Banks rattled off names: “Michelle Wu, because of some things she should have known about, she said that she didn’t know about; also, Mike Flaherty, I think that he’s just taking advantage: he was in the city council for a while, then he jumped up and ran for mayor, then he lost that fight and came back, but I don’t really see a big difference in change that he made.” Flint-Banks added, “Althea Garrison, I don’t think she has a clue. I’m going to be honest, you know… Annissa Essaibi-George, she’s good, but there’s some, you know… I think it would be nice to have a whole new city council.” “If we do what we’ve always done, we will get what we’ve always got. We want something different,” said Allen, reflecting on the need for Allston-Brighton to move away from Councilor Ciommo as their representative in the council. Notably absent from municipal turnout, the absence of young voters from municipal turnout is a source of concern for elected officials. “We have to meet them where they are,” said Rep. Pressley. “We need to create a seat at the table for youth leadership. We can’t only engage young voters when it’s time for an election.’ “How can you speak to the young people if you don’t know what their issues are?” added Rep. Pressley. “A lot of times elected officials will single-issue a constituency, so maybe they’ll only talk to young people about student debt—which is a crisis, and young people do want to know what is your solution to that, but young people care about the climate crisis, they care about gun violence prevention, they care about gentrification, and displacement, and affordable housing, they care about the solvency of social security, whether or not it will exist for them.” In spite of efforts such as the “get out of the vote” event at Roxbury Community College, interest for local politics remained at a low on Tuesday. “I meet a lot of people who tell me they don’t know who our city councilor is. I meet a lot of people who tell me they don’t even know what the city council is,” said Jonathan Allen. Sunday, March 24: in Dorchester, Boston Public Schools Educator Taushawn Tinsley announces a run for the Boston City Council, hoping to be elected to one of the four at-large seats in competition every two years. (BUTV10) Differences on issues of security and nationalism lead to the largest scuffle yet between President Trump and his French counterpart, Emmanuel Macron By ELIAS MILLER
President Donald Trump delivered harsh criticism to French President Emmanuel Macron on Tuesday, underlining the low popularity of the French president, as well as the high level of unemployment and the strength of nationalism in France. “MAKE FRANCE GREAT AGAIN!” tweeted Trump, a variant to his campaign slogan. This is also a possible callback to Macron’s own parody of the catchphrase: “Make our planet great again,” said Macron in June—a rebuke to Trump over his withdrawal from the Paris climate accord. The origin of their present quarrel: in a French radio interview on Nov. 6, Macron said, “We must protect ourselves against China, Russia and even the United States of America. When I see President Trump announcing a few weeks ago that they are coming out of a major disarmament treaty … who is the main victim? Europe and its security.” The French president’s comments, as a whole, broadly understood as a call for a European army, were met with fury from the American commander-in-chief. President Trump took to Twitter to respond as Air Force One boarded in Paris. He qualified the comment as “very insulting,” and suggested Europe “first pay its fair share of NATO, which the U.S. subsidizes greatly.” Also on Twitter, French Ambassador to the U.S. Gérard Araud decried what he viewed as false information: “Pres. [Macron] didn’t say that he was in favor of an (sic) European army ‘against the US’ as was erroneously reported by the press.” “He talks about protecting Europe from US hacking. Later on, he talked about an (sic) European army in the context of Russian threat,” added Araud, in response to an internet user. On Nov. 13, Trump amplified his Twitter attacks on Macron: “The problem is that Emmanuel suffers from a very low Approval Rating in France … There is no country more Nationalist than France, very proud people—and rightfully so!” Trump likely referenced Marine Le Pen, leader of the far-right National Rally party (formerly the National Front), who, in 2017, made international headlines by qualifying in the second round of the French presidential elections—a runoff between the two candidates who placed the highest in the first, preliminary election. Trump had all but endorsed Le Pen in her bid against her opponent, now the president. It was the second time the far right made it to the second round in France, the first being in 2002; though in 2002, her party’s nominee—her father—had a lesser share of the vote. Although Jean-Marie Le Pen had received 16.9 percent of the vote in 2002, Marine Le Pen received 21.3 percent in 2017. This would seem to confirm Trump’s gibe on growing nationalism in France, given the increasing influence of the party pushing for a “restoration of [France’s] national sovereignty.” Macron had also criticized Trump for saying he viewed himself as “absolutely a nationalist.” Responded Macron, “Nationalism is a betrayal of patriotism. By putting our interests first, with no regard for others, we erase the very thing that a nation holds dearest, and the thing that keeps it alive: its moral values.” The French government’s spokesperson, Benjamin Griveaux, responded the next day to Trump’s latest condemnation of France’s head of state. “Yesterday was November 13. We commemorated the assassination of 130 of our compatriots three years ago,” Griveaux said, referencing the 2015 Paris attacks. Using English terms, Griveaux added that Trump should have used “common decency.” Article written with Antonio Navatta and published on teenobserver.com at the American University. WASHINGTON, DC -- Michael Barr believes terrorism in the United States and abroad is here to stay. Attempts to stop militants or radicals from disrupting everyday life would only make terrorists more vigilant. He cites a fracture between two cultures that he feels will be “long and demanding.” Barr, an aviation and aircraft safety expert in California, is among a dozen people interviewed this week after a high-profile terrorist attack in Nice, France who said terrorism here and abroad is a part of everyday life now. Others responded to attacks of the last year including those domestic incidents in Orlando and San Bernardino, plus foreign attacks in Paris and Brussels, and said they see no end in sight. “Religious and political leaders will need to take a more active participation in a solution or the fight will go on for a very long time,” Barr, a senior instructor at the University of Southern California, said by email. “To stop living a normal life in constant fear is a waste of precious life,” Barr continued. In the past 12 months, more than 500 Europeans have been killed by acts of terrorism in Nice, Paris, Brussels and Turkey, according to a Teen Observer analysis. That is on the minds of American University students and graduates getting ready to travel abroad this summer and fall. Alex Mazzarisi, 22, an American University graduate, is headed in August to Copenhagen, Denmark. Mazzarisi was at the World Trade Center in New York City two days before the 9/11 attacks. She said people should not let fear dictate their lives. “There is, unfortunately, no way to prevent being in the wrong place at the wrong time,” Mazzarisi said. John Horgan, a professor of Global Studies and Psychology at Georgia State University, said terrorism will continue because it is an effective short-term strategy. He said further policymakers here and abroad may never be able to eliminate terrorism. “We need to get better at devising smarter strategies to combat terrorism,” Horgan said in an email. “If our response is based on fear, or is devised in the immediate aftermath of tragedy like we saw in Nice, then we will lose,” Horgan continued. Mary Rutenbeck, 20, a Wake Forest University student working in Washington, D.C. this summer, will spend Fall studying abroad in Copenhagen, Denmark. She believes Americans are not worse off than 20 years ago, but said that “the media makes people more aware” of incidents abroad. She hopes 20 years from now, society will be better off. Kenneth Cardwell, who works at a Tenleytown hardware store, believes politicians are not doing enough to stop terrorism. He says leaders are “telling people what they want to hear.” Eric Duvall believes terrorism and political responses to it do not matter. Instead, he said it is beyond human control. He does not see an end to the attacks around the globe because “there is nothing man can do to correct the problems down here.” Kristen Luft, 19, a summer teaching assistant at American University, plans to study abroad in Paris next year and admits there is a higher risk of terrorism there. But, it is not stopping her. “It is built on ideas,” Luft said of terrorism. “It’s harder to kill off ideas.” Article written with Antonio Navatta and published on teenobserver.com at the American University. WASHINGTON, DC -- Third party candidates run for the presidency of the United States every four years. They never win, and likely won't this year, but a leading polling group on politics found this election cycle has allowed a small breakthrough for third party candidates–they are polling higher than they have in 20 years–with many American voters unsatisfied with the two major parties. A June 29 Quinnipiac University poll found when likely voters were asked about the possibility of third party leaders, the popularity of the two major party candidates dropped. “Usually a potential benefit of third party candidates, even if they don’t win, is that they raise issues that are important to some voters, issues that the main parties are not addressing,” said Jan Leighley, a professor of Political Science at American University. “If the third party candidates can get the major parties/candidates to address these issues, that is an important accomplishment, even when they lose.” Many people would like to see third parties better represented but do not think they have a chance of getting a sufficient amount of votes. Philip Herrera, 24, said his positions are closer to those of Green Party candidate Jill Stein, but he will vote for presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton in order to prevent a Donald Trump presidency, thinking Stein cannot win and believing there is no chance for third party candidates in the current political system. “We would need to rewrite the Constitution,” Herrera said if Americans wanted to get away from a two-party system. Some Bernie Sanders supporters will cast their votes for Stein over Clinton, according to the Green Party’s website. Republicans disappointed with Trump are turning to Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson. Johnson’s slogan on his website reads, “Make American Sane Again,” a likely knock on Trump’s platform to “Make America Great Again.” But despite the messaging of third party candidates, polls show their chances are small.The Quinnipiac poll showed Johnson getting eight percent of likely voters’ ballots. Although Stein is absent from the ballot in 28 states, the poll showed she would receive four percent. Ross Perot, who was not affiliated with a major party, captured 18.91 percent of the vote in 1992 and 8.4 percent in 1996. Since then, a third party candidate has not garnered the same amount of attention. In 2012, 1.69 percent of voters opted for third party candidates compared to 1.4 percent in 2008. This year, third party candidates’ numbers are better but not enough to get people to think they have a shot at the White House. “Third-party candidates can’t win this election,” said Chris Hartnett, a registered Independent voter who is still undecided about his November choice. “They don’t have name exposure.” Esmat Hanano, 22, is unsatisfied with this year’s election and said none of the major candidates deserve his support. He has not, however, looked into possible third-party candidates and does not know those candidates by name. Garrett Schlichte, 21, believed third party candidates should get more attention, but will not be getting it anytime soon. He said more parties and candidates would provide Americans with “a greater diversity of thought.” Meg Bentley, 42, the director of biology teaching labs at American University, said the two-party system “just isn’t working.” Although many students, faculty and staff at the Northwest Washington, D.C. campus, agree that the system could be improved with more visible third-party candidates, some say they’re a long way from taking hold of high office. “Not anytime soon,” said Anila D’Mello, 26, of their chances. BOSTON -- School cafeteria food has a reputation for being distasteful, but in some cases it might even kill you.
Food outbreaks have caused two recorded deaths in the years 2000 and 2010. Additionally, there have been a total of 730 declared food-borne illnesses in American schools in the year 2013, causing 29 to be hospitalized (Centers for Disease Control Database.) This may not seem like a big number compared to the total number of American students, but anyone and everyone is a potential victim to food poisoning, which have been known to sometimes lead to fatal consequences. Infected food vehicles include, but are not at all limited to: bread, chicken, beans, pineapples and pizzas. Anyone’s favorite food can be disease-ridden by any number of germs or viruses. Seven students interviewed during their meals on the subject of food safety seemed to agree that the food was safe. These same students said that food served in a cafeteria had never made them sick. “Yeah, I think it’s safe,” declared one of the male students, “because I can see how they cook the food.” The fact food is being prepared before your very eyes collaborates to create a sense of security in some people, it is in fact one of the reasons Subway is popular, and the key to its slogan: “Eat Fresh”. However, many of the ingredients they use to prepare food in front of you have been imported, and may contain the virus that causes the illness. Food can actually get contaminated during slaughter, when irrigated with contaminated water, by cross-contamination, when insufficiently cooked or when stored at the incorrect temperature (CDC.) In fact, the Warren Towers in the Boston University campus was home to a large outbreak that affected over two dozen students in 2010, only five years ago (Mayor's Food Court). Says Reporter Christina Hager, “The sudden outbreak prompted a warning from Boston health officials." "Food Safety is an especially important issue when it comes to students, as "Many food-borne pathogens have a disproportionate impact on children younger than five [years old]. The incidence of most food-borne pathogens is highest for this demographic" (Food Safety News). Lydia Zuraw from Food Safety News goes on to explain that "Some die from these preventable illnesses, and many others suffer lasting health problems such as reactive arthritis, the need for kidney transplants, and seizures." Many schools took measures to prevent such diseases, such as installing and promoting the use of hand-sanitizers and soap dispensers, hanging food safety posters on the walls of the schools or just teaching them about the dangers of food-borne illnesses, and integrating food safety into the curriculum. |