May 8, 2018

No Image

Today in Movie Culture: 'Avengers: Infinity War' Director Commentary, the Evolution of Captain America and More

Here are a bunch of little bites to satisfy your hunger for movie culture:

Directors’ Commentary of the Day:

For the New York Times, Joe and Anthony Russo talk over the New York City battle sequence from Avengers: Infinity War:

[embedded content]

Character History of the Day:

In honor of Avengers: Infinity War, Burger Fiction chronicles the evolution of Captain America in movies and on TV:

[embedded content]

Movie Business Lesson of the Day:

Does the MPAA’s ratings system seem arbitary? Slate details how Hollywood gets around certain classification rules in this NSFW, R-rated video:

[embedded content]

Supercut of the Day:

Editor Frederic van Strydonck didn’t just compile a bunch of clips of movie characters watching movies, he also made it so they’re all watching The Big Sleep:

[embedded content]

Vintage Image of the Day:

Saul Bass, who was born on this day in 1920, designed this iconic movie poster for Otto Preminger’s 1959 movie Anatomy of a Murder:

Movie Craftperson of the day:

For Vanity Fair, Black Panther costume designer Ruth Carter discusses her work in one scene from the Marvel blockbuster:

[embedded content]

Film History of the Day:

Fandor looks at the iconic sound effect known as “the Wilhelm Scream” and how it became so popular:

[embedded content]

Movie Food of the Day:

The latest edition of Binging with Babish shows us how to make pies inspired by Adrienne Shelly’s Waitress:

[embedded content]

Truthful Marketing of the Day:

Honest Trailers does more of the same with their takedown of Fifty Shades Freed, which does more of the same with its premise:

[embedded content]

Classic Movie Clip of the Day:

Today is the 20th anniversary of the release of Deep Impact. Watch the the devasting comet collision sequence from the classic disaster movie below.

[embedded content]

and

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Congress Rolls Back Anti-Discrimination Auto Loan Rule

A worker on a Chrysler car lot passes lines of Jeeps in 2014. The House on Tuesday passed a measure to roll back guidance on auto lending issued by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Gregory Bull/AP

hide caption

toggle caption

Gregory Bull/AP

The House on Tuesday passed a measure to roll back guidance on auto lending issued by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The vote is the first test for a new strategy employed by Republicans in Congress, which could enable the repeal of hundreds of administrative regulations passed in recent decades.

The guidance, issued in 2013, was intended to limit discriminatory practices in the auto loan business. Congress repealed the guidance using the Congressional Review Act, a little-known law that allows Congress to undo the rules issued by administrative agencies and government regulators.

Congressional Republicans used the act in 2017 to repeal more than a dozen Obama-era regulations. Prior to 2017, the Congressional Review Act had been used only once since being passed in 1996.

Normally, the act requires Congress to exercise this power within a narrow window of time — 60 days after the new regulation is submitted to Congress.

But Tuesday’s vote marks the first time it has been wielded to reverse administrative guidance — meaning the regulatory agencies’ interpretations of federal laws. Because most guidance is not “submitted to Congress,” lawmakers argue they can start the clock whenever they want on hundreds of rules issued over the past two decades.

Critics worry this could open the door for congressional rollback of any number of hard-fought consumer and environmental protections. And because the act also prevents federal agencies from re-enacting “substantially similar” regulations and guidance, it means that reinstating the rules could require future congressional action.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Administration Rejects Proposal For Lifetime Medicaid Cap

Seema Verma told hospital executives that she wants states to have flexibility in how they administer Medicaid, but there are limits.

Nicholas Kamm/AFP/Getty Images

hide caption

toggle caption

Nicholas Kamm/AFP/Getty Images

The Trump administration has made clear it would like to remake the American health care system. There’s been the protracted battle over the Affordable Care Act. Now, there are some new moves on the future of Medicaid.

On Monday, the federal government released decisions on requests from two states to change the way they administer the health care program for low-income people.

The first decision came on lifetime caps. Kansas wanted to cut off Medicaid benefits for some people after 36 months.

At a meeting of the American Hospital Association in Washington, D.C., Seema Verma, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, made clear that she wants states to have lots of flexibility. But she also drew a line on how far that flexibility can go.

“We’re also determined to make sure that the Medicaid program remains the safety net for those that need it most,” Verma said. “To this end, we have determined we will not approve Kansas’ recent request to place a lifetime limit on Medicaid benefits for some beneficiaries.”

In Kansas, the number of adults eligible for Medicaid is already pretty small, mostly the elderly and the disabled. “Non-disabled adults who don’t have minor children are not eligible for Medicaid at all in Kansas, no matter how low their income is,” says Louise Norris, who writes about health care policy for healthinsurance.org.

The cap would therefore have affected only parents of young kids with extremely low incomes — those who make 38 percent of the federal poverty limit. “So to put that in perspective, if you have a household of three people — like a single parent with two kids — you’re talking $8,000 a year in total income,” Norris said.

The rejection of lifetime caps in Kansas sends a signal to the handful of other states — Maine, Arizona, Utah and Wisconsin — that have similar proposals pending.

Later in the day, there was another decision on Medicaid, when New Hampshire became the fourth state to have its request approved to add work requirements.

Joan Alker of the Georgetown University Center for Children and Families said the timing of the decisions on Kansas and New Hampshire was probably planned. “The fact that they rushed them out together suggests that they wanted to quickly get back to their message that states know best,” she said.

What wasn’t determined Tuesday was the outcome of Kansas’ proposal to add its own work requirements. All of the states that have received approval so far — Indiana, Kentucky, Arkansas and now New Hampshire — expanded eligibility for Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act.

If Kansas’ request is approved, it would be a first for a nonexpansion state. And Alker says many adults in Kansas would lose their Medicaid coverage. “You have a parent who, if they met the work requirement their income would be too high and they’d lose Medicaid, and if they don’t meet the work requirement they’d get kicked off,” Alker says. She calls it a Catch-22.

Other states that didn’t expand Medicaid and also want a work requirement — like Mississippi and Alabama — are closely watching what happens with Kansas’ proposal.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Margaret Reid Did Well Betting Kentucky Derby Races

After carefully analyzing the odds, she picked the winning horses in five consecutive derby races. She spent $18 on her bet and by the time Justify won the main race, Reid had won $1.2 million.

RACHEL MARTIN, HOST:

Good morning. I’m Rachel Martin. Placing bets on the Kentucky Derby is part of the fun – right? – a good excuse to pick a horse to cheer for during those exhilarating couple of minutes around the track. Racing fan Margaret Reid got more than a good time, though. After carefully analyzing the odds, she picked the winning horses in five consecutive Derby races. She spent 18 bucks on the bet, and by the time Justify won the race, Reid had won $1.2 million – almost as much as the winning horse and his owners took home. It’s MORNING EDITION.

Copyright © 2018 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?)