TPM Cafe: Opinion

I'm a single mother of two-year-old twin boys. Five months ago, I was laid off from my job. I struggled to make it on 100 dollars of unemployment a week. Bills piled up. My debt was growing. And a clock was ticking: if I didn't find a job in two weeks, I'd lose my child care assistance.

I gave it my all. I scoured job lists, sent out resumes and told everyone I knew that I was looking for work. After 14 days, my deadline hit and there wasn't a job in sight. So just at the moment I needed it most, my assistance was cut off.

But I'm scrappy and don't give up easily. I cobbled together $175 to pay for two days of child care a week so I could step up the hunt. A month later, I landed a temporary job. My child care assistance started up again. Things were looking up.

Only two months into the job, I got laid off again. This time, my child care assistance was terminated immediately. My heart sank ... but I threw myself into another intense search. Day after day, I kept at it. Several weeks later, I started a new job and resubmitted my application for child care assistance. But I was told I no longer qualify. No reason was given. All I know is that I'm not getting assistance.

It's been a roller coaster. But I'm grateful to have work. Every month, I patch together $720 for my sons' child care. My boys are in a safe place and they're doing well. But, at the end of the month, after paying for rent, food, gas and other items, I'm left with almost nothing. At night, I lay awake determined to build a bright future.

--F. Guevara, Nevada

Read More →

This is a national emergency.

As I walked through the neighborhoods in Boulder, Colorado several weeks ago, navigating streets that had first become creeks and then rivers, the reality of climate change truly hit home. The devastation Americans saw on the news was a true reflection of what was happening on the ground. Though I am grateful that the storm has passed, the vulnerability remains.

Just as scary as bearing witness to such a massive loss of life and livelihood is knowing that it could happen again. Of course, it took an extraordinary convergence of events -- with moisture feeding into the storm system from both the Pacific and the Gulf of Mexico coupled with an erratic Jetstream creating blocking patterns over the Rockies -- to make this seven-day tropical storm of truly biblical proportions possible. But these days the extraordinary is quickly becoming the everyday, and there's no reason to think it couldn't happen again.

Read More →

A team of senior Obama administration officials went to Geneva last week to negotiate a set of constraints that would hold Iran to its pledge not to develop a nuclear weapon. As for the chorus of skeptics, it's not clear what they want -- aside from showcasing their own toughness. In the months ahead, the talks will test the intentions of Iran's seemingly cooperative new Rouhani government, probing whether they will actually accept strict limits and intrusive verification. The process will likewise test hardliners here at home, particularly in Congress. Will they be wiling to accept Iran's acceptance of a diplomatic deal?

As we debate the issue within the U.S., the test of intentions is about making a deal Iran can live with. Of course, all of this would be so much easier if Iran agreed to all the limits and conditions we want. Unfortunately that's not how it works; the essence of negotiation is the trading of concessions. Such basics of deal-making might seem too simple to be worth reviewing, but the recent hard-liner warnings about an Iranian nuclear deal show the need for a refresher course.

Read More →

Don Lemon is back at it. After embracing the idea of how respectability politics could have saved Trayvon Martin's life, Lemon has set his sights on the moral failings of unwed parents. In a piece published at Black America Web, the CNN anchor wrote about the tragic beating and ultimate death of the two-year-old son of NFL superstar Adrian Peterson at the hands of a man who was not the boy's father:

"This Adrian Peterson secret love child beating death story has been really bothering me," Lemon said. "Bothering me obviously because the boy was just two years old and was allegedly beaten to death by his mom's boyfriend who was not the child's father. Bothering me also because the dead boy's father is Minnesota Vikings star running back Adrian Peterson, an NFL MVP, who appears to be more MIA, than MVP."

This time, Lemon has joined the growing public discourse (it so polite a word as discourse can be used) that wants to find some moral failing in Adrian Peterson to help us understand the tragedy of his murdered child.

This critique all hinges on the assumption that without such guidance we would all make the mistake of simply mourning a tragic crime when we should instead be finding someone to blame. The driving need to find a villain is a condition of the American psyche, perhaps even of the human psyche. But American culture seems particularly fond of turning messy human interactions into a clear morality tales with bad guys and good guys. Some people even come close to making these morality tales an art form. Don Lemon is not one of them.

Read More →

As an attorney who has represented involuntary porn victims ("revenge porn" is too narrow), I was dismayed by Cathy Reisenwitz's TPM Cafe piece, "Revenge Porn Is Awful, But The Law Against It Is Worse." Reisenwitz's arguments might apply in a cold academic world, but not in the real world.

In the real world, a young woman takes erotic photos to share with her husband/boyfriend. Maybe she and her boyfriend/husband each take some. Maybe he takes them without her knowledge. Maybe the relationship ends badly, or maybe it doesn't end at all but somebody hacks into her supposedly secure email or Photobucket account. (This is actually a booming industry.)

One day, she or her mom or dad or little brother picks up the phone and a voice announces that this real life young woman's most intimate photographs are displayed on a website along with her real name, home town, and links to her Facebook and LinkedIn pages. Suddenly, she personally, not anonymously, is subjected to mockery, ridicule, and personal attacks--Slut! Fat ass, ugly tits!--and "compliments" such as, I'd shove it right up that tight ass! Even more ominously--Hey, I know her! She was a prude in high school but I know where she lives so maybe I'll drop by and say hi now that I know what she's really like! Oh by the way, here's her daddy's email address, he'll love to see how his little princess has grown up! Here are the email addresses and Facebook pages for her friends and family and boss, let's let them know what a slut she is!

Read More →

Updated 4:16 p.m. ET

Though we've narrowly averted debt-ceiling mania, our favorite congressional characters are still tasked with arriving at a sustainable budget. That process is sure to bring debates over entitlement spending, again! It's true that U.S. healthcare costs contribute to the debt and are out of control. And it's true that we need to do something about it. But cutting coverage, the favorite solution of politicians on both sides of the aisle, won't solve America's ballooning healthcare costs.

Our three trillion dollar health care sector functions as a market. There are suppliers that provide products and services (doctors and companies that sell medications and devices), there are consumers (like you and me), and there are purchasers (insurance companies and the government). In purchasing health coverage for the military, elderly, and disadvantaged, the U.S. government accounts for two-thirds of all health care expenditures. Amidst heated partisan political battles, our Congressional representatives keep proposing to manage the country's debt by cutting the government's commitment to provide health care coverage for seniors (Medicare) and the disadvantaged (Medicaid). What our politicians aren't seeing is that this blinkered approach won't improve health and is actually business-unfriendly to boot.

Read More →

Writing here at TPM on Wednesday, Cathy Reisenwitz floated the libertarian defense of allowing men, in an act of revenge against women (usually for daring to dump them), to upload naked pictures of the women to "revenge porn" sites. California has already narrowly banned the practice, though Reisenwitz overstated the likelihood that the criminal penalties for it will lead to more overcrowding of prisons, as the law remains a misdemeanor with jail time as the maximum penalty. Other states, including New York, are expected to follow.

Reisenwitz is concerned that free speech is in serious danger if people who don't have permission to publish private nude photos are not permitted to publish those photos. That seems an overblown concern in a society that otherwise has some fairly strong protections over certain kinds of intellectual property. If free speech hasn't been conquered because I can't watch some naked lady on HBO without paying them first, it seems free speech is safe if men who want to punish women for dumping them can't publish their naked pictures all over the Internet.

Let's be clear: The free speech rights of men who are embittered by discovering that women are allowed to decline further relations with you are not really going to be affected if they can't publish nude images of a woman without her permission.

Read More →

College men: Stop getting drunk. It's closely associated with sexual assault. And yet we're reluctant to tell men to stop doing it.

Slate's Emily Yoffe lit up a firestorm in social media with an article earlier this morning with the headline and subtitle, "College Women: Stop Getting Drunk. It's closely associated with sexual assault. And yet we're reluctant to tell women to stop doing it." As a writer, I know that article titles are not written by authors and can actually even undermine the point of a piece. But, that's not what happened here. Yoffe carefully provides gender-neutral statistics regarding sexual assault and binge drinking on campus.

Her conclusions? "A common denominator in these cases is alcohol, often copious amounts, enough to render the young woman incapacitated."

How about: "A common denominator in these cases is a lack of education, often a copious lack, about consent and what constitutes rape."

Read More →

In follow up to my earlier post, here are a couple of additional points.

1) A related but different argument petitioners are making about why the PSD provisions don't apply to the regulation of greenhouse gases is that the application of the provisions would lead to absurd results. The absurd results come about because the definition of "major source" in the PSD statutory language -- 100 tons per year of any air pollutant -- would sweep in a huge number of small sources that Congress never intended to regulate. In order to avoid absurd results, the Court should find that the plain language of the PSD provisions doesn't apply. Stanford Law Professor Michael Wara asked me about this argument in the comments section of my last post.

As I responded to Michael, I don't buy the absurd results argument. Here's why. EPA has faced other circumstances in which statutory language sweeps in a huge number of potentially very small sources. One of those provisions is the definition of "point source" under the Clean Water Act, which includes "any discernible, confined and discreet covenyance, including but not limited to any pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissue, container, rolling stock, concentrated animal feeding operation, or vessel or other floating craft, from which pollutants are or may be discharged." In 1973 EPA attempted to exempt from this language a number of types of sources in order to keep the number of sources it was regulating to something short of absurd. Among other things, EPA argued that the language of the statute gave it power "to instruct each individual farmer on his farming practices." In NRDC v. Costle, 568 F.2d 1369 (1977), the D.C. Circuit struck down EPA's regulations exempting various sources because the regulations violated the plain language of the Clean Water Act. The court also suggested that EPA could "make full use of its interpretational authority" by using options to minimize its administrative burdens. These options included area-wide regulation and general permits that could be applied to small sources.

Read More →

It's hard not to sympathize with victims of so-called "revenge porn." Hearing women such as Rebekah Wells and Holly Jacobs talk to a concerned Katie Couric about having their bosses and colleagues see them in states of (un)dress entirely inappropriate for the office elicits a feeling of protectiveness. No one who isn't being paid for it wants months of tentative emails from concerned friends letting them know that they're naked on the internet again.

This sympathy certainly undergirds a bill recently signed by California governor Jerry Brown which outlaws revenge porn. The state of California can now add people who post naked photos of their former partners to its criminally overcrowded prisons if they do so without permission and with the intent to cause emotional distress or humiliation. Offenders may spend up to six months in jail and pay a $1,000 fine. Repeat offenders can be imprisoned for up to a year.

Now legislators in New York, Texas, Wisconsin and Georgia are looking to enact similar laws. Proposed legislation in New York would actually widen to the ban to include photos victims take of themselves. Other activists are pursuing a ban on revenge porn at the federal level.

While well-intentioned, this kind of legislation is over-broad, poses serious free-speech threats and may not even be necessary going forward.

The first thing it's important to keep in mind is that revenge porn laws criminalize speech.

Read More →
Want to contribute to TPM Cafe? Email ideas for your pieces to us at talk@talkingpointsmemo.com
Want to contribute to TPM Cafe? Email ideas for your pieces to us at talk@talkingpointsmemo.com

TPMLivewire