January 28, 2017

No Image

History Made At Australian Open As All Singles Finalists In Their 30s

All four of the women and men who made it to the Australian Open singles finals are in their 30s. Courtney Nguyen writes for the Women’s Tennis Association, explains why older athletes are dominating.

MICHEL MARTIN, HOST:

Let’s turn for a few minutes to tennis where history is being made at the Australian Open. All four of the women and men that made it to the singles finals are in their 30s. That’s an age that used to mean retirement was at hand if you were still playing at all, and the finals rekindled two historic rivalries. Early this morning, Venus and Serena Williams faced off in a Grand Slam final for the ninth time in their careers. It was 36-year-old Venus Williams’ first major championship finals appearance since 2009, but it was the younger Williams sister Serena who took the victory and broke records.

At 35 years old, Serena became the oldest woman to win a Grand Slam singles title in the modern era. The win also marked her 23rd Grand Slam title, the most in the modern era. But there’s nothing but love in this rivalry. In her championship acceptance speech, Serena made sure to thank her sister.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

SERENA WILLIAMS: She’s my inspiration. She’s the only reason I’m standing here today and the only reason that the Williams sisters exist, so thank you, Venus, for inspiring me.

(APPLAUSE)

MARTIN: Tomorrow morning, the men’s final. That will bring Roger Federer, who is 35, and Rafael Nadal, who is 30, back together for the – get this – 35th time since 2004.

To talk about all this, we’re joined now by Courtney Nguyen. She’s a senior writer for WTA Insider. That’s a website that covers women’s tennis. She’s with us now via Skype from Melbourne, Australia. Courtney Nguyen, thanks so much for joining us once again.

COURTNEY NGUYEN: Happy to do it.

MARTIN: So, first of all, were any of these four finalists expected to make it this far?

NGUYEN: Well, I think the only one that really was expected and was a pre-tournament favorite was Serena Williams. She was the number-two player in the world. Now she’s the number-one player in the world by winning. But the other three, especially Venus Williams, really were unexpected storylines. Again, with Roger and Rafa turning back the clock – definitely not a final we expected on the men’s side either.

MARTIN: Is this showing at the Australian Open Finals something unique – we’re talking about age here – or are we seeing this elsewhere in professional tennis?

NGUYEN: Well, I think that the sport in general is aging, and it’s the best thing about – that could happen to the sport. You cultivate these stars, and it’s good business to kind of make sure that these stars stay in the game as long as possible. This is a trend that has been happening for a while, particularly spearheaded by Serena.

MARTIN: Is this about older players hanging on longer, being better able to preserve their bodies, you know, for whatever reason getting better training, better guidance about conditioning or is it – is there – are there a lack of younger stars coming up the ranks?

NGUYEN: I think a lot of it is the aspect of endurance. You know, tennis is a sport of teenage prodigies. It’s what we’ve always been used to from the ’70s and ’80s. We haven’t seen that very much in the 2000s, and I think the big reason why is because an 18 year old – it’s tough for them to transition onto the pro tour and really be able to compete physically with the likes of, you know, these strong 30 year olds who get, as you said, the training and the conditioning.

MARTIN: As I mentioned you are in Melbourne covering all this, how are the fans taking all this in? Is this exciting? What are you hearing? What’s the vibe?

NGUYEN: It’s pure excitement. And I think that goes hand-in-hand with the nostalgia and the wistfulness of it all. I mean, these are four champions in Federer, Nadal and Serena and Venus who just have so much history down here in Australia, have so much history in the game. And this is a sport where we like to see our champions as much as we love to see that break-out ingenue start, you know, come through and make a name for themselves. These four names in particular are the ones that really tug at the heartstrings of tennis fans.

MARTIN: That was Courtney Nguyen. She’s a senior writer at WTA Insider. She joined us via Skype from Melbourne where she is doing hard duty covering the Australian Open. Courtney, thanks so much for joining us.

NGUYEN: Always a pleasure.

Copyright © 2017 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Countries Listed On Trump's Refugee Ban Don't Include Those He Has Business With

President Donald Trump’s refugee ban in the Middle East could be one of the first conflicts of interest for the president, as his bans avoided nations that he has business ties in.

MICHEL MARTIN, HOST:

We are continuing our coverage of the Trump administration’s executive orders implementing a permanent ban on those coming from Syria and a temporary ban of citizens coming from six additional Muslim-majority countries – Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Yemen and Sudan.

Now, one aspect of the new policy that has drawn notice are countries that are not on the list, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates. And those are the countries of origin of a number of people who carried out terrorist attacks in the U.S. starting with September 11, 2001. Those countries also happen to be places where President Trump and his family have business interests.

That’s one reason ethics experts continue to raise questions about how President Trump is addressing potential conflicts or even the appearance of them. NPR senior business editor Marilyn Geewax is heading up our coverage of this issue, so she is with us now to talk us through it.

MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: Hi, Michel.

MARTIN: So can you give us an example of what business deals Mr. Trump has in the Middle East?

GEEWAX: He has a lot of properties, mostly golf courses in the United Arab Emirates. He has luxury towers in Turkey. In recent years, he’s also formed companies in Egypt. And in 2015, his daughter, Ivanka, who’s had a very prominent role in the Trump Organization said that she was looking at what she called opportunities in the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

The Trump Organization has all kinds of operations in other Muslim-majority countries outside of the Middle East like Indonesia, Azerbaijan. But those places were not added to his list of places that need extra restrictions.

MARTIN: So are the countries Mr. Trump has singled out places in which he has done or has pursued business deals?

GEEWAX: Well, according to his campaign financial filings, he does not have business interests in those countries where he’s imposing these new restrictions. Now, it’s fair to point out that these countries do have very serious problems. They’ve had civil wars. They have extremist groups there, and that raises concerns. And those are reflected in U.S. Immigration vetting systems that we have in place already.

So that list has raised the hackles of ethics experts. They fear that this list was shaped at least in part by Trump’s desire to remain on good terms with the governments where he is doing business.

MARTIN: Tell us a bit more about what these ethics experts are saying.

GEEWAX: One of them, for example, spoke with NPR. That’s Norm Eisen. He’s a former ethics adviser to President Obama, and he’s a fellow now at Brookings Institution. He says that it looks to him like Trump was singling out countries that did not pay him tribute. That was his words.

You know, it’s very hard to get into the head of the president to know what he’s thinking, but that’s exactly the point about having conflicts of interests. It makes people question your motives. In fact, Eisen says this is the kind of thing that could even lead to a constitutional crisis.

MARTIN: Well, those are very strong words. What does this have to do with the Constitution?

GEEWAX: There’s this thing called the Emoluments Clause in the Constitution. That’s a kind of strange word, but it means gifts or bribes from foreign governments. The Founding Fathers were very clear that they did not want a president enriching himself from foreign governments, so there are a lot of people who are questioning whether or not allowing some Middle Eastern countries to have people enter the United States while putting other people on a banned list reflects more the president’s interests rather than the best interests of the country.

MARTIN: That’s NPR’s senior business editor Marilyn Geewax joining us once again from our studios in Washington, D.C. Marilyn, thank you.

GEEWAX: You’re welcome.

Copyright © 2017 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

John Hurt, Distinguished British Actor, Passes Away at 77

John Hurt / A Man for All Seasons

Sir John Hurt, a British actor who enjoyed a long career filled with distinguished performances, has passed away, according to multiple news reports. He was 77.

Born in a coal mining village in England, Hurt was accepted into the Royal Academy of Dramatic Arts and made both his stage and movie debuts in 1962. He first gained international attention in A Man for All Seasons (above right and below) in 1966.

[embedded content]

On television, he made big marks as the notorious Quentin Crisp in The Naked Civil Servant and in the miniseries I, Claudius as the nasty, duplicitous Caligula.

[embedded content]

He earned an Academy Award nomination for his dramatic supporting role in Midnight Express and followed that up with his brief, yet incredibly memorable (and NSFW) appearance in Ridley Scott’s Alien.

[embedded content]

It was his lead performance in The Elephant Man, however, that showed the full range of his talent, bringing great empathy and understanding to his character, even beneath layers of makeup.

[embedded content]

Directed By David Lynch, the movie was made by Mel Brooks’ production company and Brooks has shared his feelings on the actor.

No one could have played The Elephant Man more memorably. He carried that film into cinematic immortality. He will be sorely missed.

— Mel Brooks (@MelBrooks) January 28, 2017

Hurt earned another Academy Award nomination for his performance. He also continued to work with Brooks, showing his comic skills in History of the World: Part 1 and Spaceballs. In 1984, he portrayed George Orwell’s iconic character Winston Smith.

[embedded content]

Though he rarely nabbed lead roles, he remained much in demand as a supporting actor. His voice made him a natural for animated movies as well.

Four animated #JohnHurt films.#RIP pic.twitter.com/JdX4HY0knW

— Rupert Pupkin (@bobfreelander) January 28, 2017

Hurt became known to a newer generation in three installments of the Harry Potter series, Hellboy, V for Vendetta, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and Snowpiercer. He had a fine reputation among his fellow actors, as noted in this fond remembrance.

John Hurt ?? pic.twitter.com/YhTMckHRuI

— kath ?? (@KathyBurke) January 28, 2017

Sir John Hurt is survived by his wife, Anwen Rees-Myers, and two children.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Obamacare Repeal Could Threaten Provisions That Help Older Adults

Medicaid doesn’t just provide health care for the poor; it also pays for long-term care for a lot of older people, including the majority of nursing home residents. Repealing the ACA could change the way Medicaid programs are funded. Bill Gallery/Doctor Stock/Science Faction/Getty Images hide caption

toggle caption

Bill Gallery/Doctor Stock/Science Faction/Getty Images

Republican lawmakers meeting in Philadelphia this week say they want their replacement of Obamacare to be done by spring. There is no consensus on a plan yet, but several Republicans in Congress have already circulated proposals that could reduce or eliminate features of the federal health law that have benefited older Americans.

Here are some examples:

Prescription drugs

The Affordable Care Act expanded Medicare’s prescription drug benefit. Before the ACA, people on Medicare had to deal with a gap in that insurance coverage that came to be known as the doughnut hole. That’s the point at which Medicare would stop paying part of the cost of drugs, and beneficiaries would have to buy them at full price. Then, when the patient’s out-of-pocket costs reached a level deemed to be “catastrophic,” Medicare would start paying most of the cost of the drugs again.

A 2011 study from the Kaiser Family Foundation showed that when patients had to pay full price, they’d skip some of their prescribed medications — and that could, potentially, result in sicker patients and higher costs for Medicare.

Article continues after sponsorship

Gradually, the ACA has been closing the doughnut hole coverage gap. According to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, beneficiaries have saved more than $23.5 billion in prescription drug costs. It’s unknown if this program would be maintained in a Republican plan that replaces the ACA.

Medicaid

Medicaid is commonly thought of as the program that provides health care for the poor. But it also pays for long-term care for a lot of older people, including the majority of nursing home residents.

One idea in some of the Republican proposals for replacing the Affordable Care Act is to turn Medicaid from a guaranteed benefit into a block grant to states. States would get a fixed amount of money from the federal government, and could make their own decisions on how to spend it.

That’s an idea that’s been popular for some time among conservatives such as House Speaker Paul Ryan. They argue that states know their needs better than Washington does, and the block grant would give states flexibility in meeting those needs.

Critics fear this could do away with many protections that federal law currently provides for vulnerable older people. They also worry about what might happen in an economic downturn, when the demand for Medicaid goes up, but the amount of federal money allocated for it stays the same. For example, would states have to choose between cutting services for poor children versus cutting programs for the frail elderly?

Limiting the cost of insurance premiums for older adults

Before the Affordable Care Act, insurance companies could charge people in their 50s and 60s many times more than they’d charge a younger person for the same policy. The affordable care act put a limit on that. Now Insurance companies can only charge older people three times as much as they charge people a few decades younger. But the various GOP replacement proposals either set higher limits — five or six times higher — or they don’t have any limits at all.

A study sponsored by the Rand Corporation and the Commonwealth Fund found that if older Americans were charged five times more for insurance than younger people, about 400,000 would no longer be able to afford to buy health insurance.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)