Articles by admin

No Image

After Abuse Scandal, USA Gymnastics Says It Will Take Steps To Protect Athletes

USA Gymnastics announced Tuesday that it will adopt all 70 of the recommendations in an independent review of its policies about reporting abuse. An investigation by The Indianapolis Star last year found that at least 368 gymnasts have alleged they were sexually assaulted by adults working in the sport.

“Even one instance of child abuse is one too many,” USA Gymnastics said in a statement on its website. “USA Gymnastics is very sorry that anyone has been harmed during his or her gymnastics career, and we offer our deepest regrets to any athlete who suffered abuse or mistreatment while participating in the sport. By working together, we can move the sport forward to better prevent the opportunity for abuse to occur.”

The organization’s board unanimously adopted the report’s recommendations on Monday night, the Associated Press reports. But some say USAG’s pledge to do better isn’t enough.

“The same people who have groomed this environment and didn’t catch it to begin with, and now all of a sudden you’re telling us overnight this is going to be fixed?” Olympic gold medalist Dominique Moceanu told the Star.

Attorney John Manly, whose firm represents more than 100 people who allege abuse by former team doctor Larry Nassar, called the report “a public relations facade,” according to the AP.

“The report calls for a change in culture but those who created the toxic culture remain in charge of the organization,” said Manly in a statement, the AP reports. “The lack of any real investigation, facts or accountability for those who failed thousands of boys and girls victimized by Nassar and others in the report is disturbing.”

Late last year, USA Gymnastics hired Deborah Daniels, a former federal prosecutor and current partner at an Indianapolis-based law firm, to conduct an independent review of its bylaws, policies, procedures and practices related to handling sexual misconduct matters, and to make recommendations on how to improve.

That report was released yesterday, and its overarching recommendation is a “cultural shift” at both the organization and its member clubs. “USA Gymnastics has never felt it had the ability to exert influence over the club,” Daniels told the AP. “You can use membership to enforce the policies.”

One of Daniels’ recommendations is reducing the power of the organization’s president. “A president who was not inclined to take reports of misconduct seriously, or who was concerned about tarnishing the reputation of the organization, or who was a friend of the respondent in the matter, would have the authority to dismiss the complaint, or choose not to pursue it, without the involvement of others.”

The group’s former president and CEO, Steve Penny, resigned in March under pressure that followed the Star‘s investigation. USA Gymnastics expects to hire Penny’s replacement by the fall, the newspaper reports.

USA Gymnastics staff received “little, if any, formal training” relating to the dynamics or prevention of child abuse, according to Daniels’ report, and it also had no staff dedicated to child protection. The organization says it is “in the final stages” of hiring a Director of Safe Sport, who will be charged with driving the importance of athlete safety and creating education and training plans for athletes, parents and coaches.

The Daniels report describes the specific qualities of women’s gymnastics that increase its athletes’ risk of sexual abuse and harassment: the young age of athletes, long hours of training that prevent athletes from receiving typical socialization, an emphasis on toughness and not complaining, physical contact as a coaches “spot” an athlete or correct her form, and an emphasis on obedience. “Everything about this environment, while understandable in the context of a highly competitive Olympic sport, tends to suppress reporting of inappropriate activity,” the report says.

And parents of elite gymnasts often defer to coaches, the report explains: “[P]arents learn that they must turn their child’s upbringing and discipline over to the coach during the training portions of her day, and even beyond. If the coach orders no desserts, the parent is doing the child a disservice by taking her out for ice cream. … And generally, the parents are not themselves gymnasts, so they are uncertain of the propriety of actions that may be taken by coaches. They want their child to succeed, so they tend to defer to the authority figures in the sport and not question them.”

The report recommends USA Gymnastics create a database of coaches who are dismissed from member clubs, so that coaches suspected of abuse do not move from one club to another. The AP reports that such a database is planned.

USA Gymnastics listed a number of policies it would introduce to decrease “opportunities for grooming and other inappropriate interactions.” Those policies include prohibiting adult members from being alone with minor gymnasts, sharing or being alone in a sleeping room with gymnasts, or having “out-of-program” contact with gymnasts via email, text or social media.

“What we’ve recommended can’t happen overnight, it will take thoughtful and strategic planning to implement,” Daniels told the AP on Tuesday. “If USA Gymnastics adopts recommendations and implements them, it is poised to be in the forefront.”

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Former Trump Campaign Manager Paul Manafort Registers As A Foreign Agent

Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort had resigned his position last August after his work for Ukrainian interests came under scrutiny.

Matt Rourke/AP

hide caption

toggle caption

Matt Rourke/AP

A firm headed by Paul Manafort, who served as President Trump’s campaign manager last year, made more than $17 million in two years working for the pro-Russia political party that controlled Ukraine’s government, according to documents filed late Tuesday.

Manafort, who resigned from Trump’s campaign last August after his work for Ukrainian interests came under scrutiny, has registered as a foreign agent with the U.S. Justice Department, as did his deputy, Rick Gates.

Manafort spokesman Jason Maloni said Manafort had started the registration process under the Foreign Agents Registration Act in September of last year, before the November 2016 election.

“Paul’s primary focus was always directed at domestic Ukrainian political campaign work and that is reflected in yesterday’s filing. Paul has appreciated the professionalism and guidance of the FARA unit throughout this process,” Maloni said.

Manafort did domestic political consulting for the Party of Regions, headed by former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, who fled to Russia after an uprising in 2014. Much of Manafort’s work was aimed at “advancing the goal of greater political and economic integration between Ukraine and the West,” the documents say.

“Manafort was representing a political party, a very strong pro-Russian political party in … Ukraine from 2012 to 2014, pulling in a whopping $17 million by the way,” says Craig Holman, government affairs lobbyist at Public Citizen, a progressive public interest group.

Holman says Manafort should have filed the disclosure forms right after he began working for Ukraine’s government.

Manafort’s work in Ukraine ended in 2014, after Yanukovych stepped down and well before Manafort worked for Trump’s campaign.

Manafort is one of several current and former Trump associates whose ties to the former Soviet Union have attracted attention. He is said to be a focus of interest in the investigation headed by Department of Justice special counsel Robert Mueller into Russia’s interference in the U.S. presidential election.

Manafort is the second Trump associate to register retroactively as a foreign agent. Former national security adviser Michael Flynn has acknowledged lobbying for the government of Turkey in the months leading up to last year’s election.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Lawmakers Warn Senate Health Care Bill Could Worsen Opioid Crisis

Some senators are concerned about how the Senate Republicans health care bill would affect treatment for opioid addiction.

ROBERT SIEGEL, HOST:

As we’ve heard, one of the issues causing concern among some Republican senators is what the health care bill would mean for states dealing with problems related to opioid addiction. The Senate bill has funding in it to help, but it may not be nearly enough to counteract the cuts the bill makes to Medicaid. NPR White House correspondent Tamara Keith reports.

TAMARA KEITH, BYLINE: In late May, several senators went to the floor of the Senate to talk about people in their districts affected by the opioid crisis. West Virginia Republican Shelley Moore Capito talked about Shelley Carter (ph).

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO: She told me her drug habit began when she was 12 years old.

KEITH: Capito’s state has the unfortunate distinction of having the highest per capita death rate from opioids. Thirty-six per 100,000 people died from overdoses on heroin, fentanyl and other opioids in 2015. But Chelsea Carter is one of the lucky ones.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

CAPITO: Her story, Chelsea’s story, is an example of the progress that can be made by fully committing to fighting the drug epidemic and that there are victories and that there are programs that work.

KEITH: Carter has been in long-term recovery since 2008.

CHELSEA CARTER: I’ve came a long way from where I was nine years ago, sitting in a jail cell.

KEITH: She went from facing jail time to treatment, grad school, and is now the program director at Appalachian Health Services. She estimates about 90 percent of the people that come into her clinic for treatment for substance use disorders are on Medicaid, the federal program for the poor that West Virginia chose to expand under the Affordable Care Act. The Senate bill would phase out that expansion, and so Carter’s watching the debate closely.

CARTER: We are losing people daily to this. I’m treating generations of drug abuse. And with the people dying of opiate drug overdoses every day, I just don’t see how we could cut funding from something that’s saving lives.

KEITH: Yesterday, Senator Capito announced she opposes the health care bill in its current form. She cited cuts to Medicaid and concerns about what the bill would mean for people dealing with opioid addiction. There’s a pretty direct correlation between states with high overdose death rates and Republican senators expressing reservations about the bill.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

DEAN HELLER: It doesn’t protect Nevadans on Medicaid and the most vulnerable Nevadans.

KEITH: Senator Dean Heller from Nevada came out early against it.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

HELLER: On Medicaid expansion, probably half – half of the dollars that were spent on that was on mental health and opioid abuse.

KEITH: Heller and others could still change their minds or be persuaded by changes to the bill. And one lever Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell could employ is increasing funding in the bill for grants to help states respond to the opioid crisis. Currently the bill would give states $2 billion to deal with opioids in 2018. Senator Rob Portman from Ohio, who also opposes the bill in its current form, is pushing for that fund to go up to $45 billion over the next decade. But even 45 billion wouldn’t be enough, says Harvard health economist Richard Frank, who previously served in the Obama administration.

RICHARD FRANK: It is one part of trying to compensate from taking people’s insurance away, but it doesn’t cover nearly what the needs are from these populations.

KEITH: Things like treatment for hepatitis C, HIV, car accidents, emergency room visits, lifesaving rescue drugs.

FRANK: My estimate is that we’re talking 180 billion over 10 years, not 45 billion.

KEITH: The Congressional Budget Office estimates that in 2026, there would be 15 million fewer people covered by Medicaid than under current law. The White House and some congressional Republicans cast doubt on the estimates of the CBO. And supporters of the bill argue states would have more flexibility to tailor Medicaid coverage to the needs of their populations. Michael Botticelli, the last drug czar under President Obama, says love it or hate it, Obamacare did allow a lot more people to get treatment. Botticelli now heads the Grayken Center for Addiction Medicine at Boston Medical Center.

MICHAEL BOTTICELLI: You know, we’re in the greatest health crisis that we’ve had since the height of the AIDS epidemic. And we’ve seen the dramatic gains that we’ve been able to make and that people are able to make with Medicaid coverage.

KEITH: Botticelli finds it hard to believe senators he worked with to help combat the opioid epidemic would consider voting for this bill. And at this moment, it’s still an open question as to whether they will. Tamara Keith, NPR News.

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

Sarah Palin Sues 'New York Times,' Says Editorial Defamed Her

Sarah Palin seen at Politicon 2016 at The Pasadena Convention Center on June 26, 2016, in Pasadena, Calif.

Colin Young-Wolff/Colin Young-Wolff/Invision/AP

hide caption

toggle caption

Colin Young-Wolff/Colin Young-Wolff/Invision/AP

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin filed a defamation lawsuit against The New York Times Tuesday in a federal court in Manhattan.

Palin, a former vice presidential nominee, says the newspaper published a statement about her in an editorial earlier this month that it “knew to be false.”

The editorial, which was corrected the next day, linked one of Palin’s political action committee ads to the mass shooting in January 2011 that severely wounded then-Arizona Rep. Gabby Giffords.

Lawyers for Palin say The Times “violated the law and its own policies” when it accused her of inciting the 2011 attack that killed six people.

The New York Times reports:

“The editorial was published online on June 14, the day a gunman opened fire at a baseball field where Republican lawmakers were practicing for an annual charity game. The editorial said there was a link between political incitement and the mass shooting in Arizona that severely wounded Representative Gabby Giffords and said that Ms. Palin’s “political action committee circulated a map of targeted electoral districts that put Ms. Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized cross hairs.”

The Times later issued a correction, saying that there was no established link between political statements and the shooting and that the map circulated by Ms. Palin’s PAC had depicted electoral districts, not individual Democratic lawmakers, beneath the stylized cross hairs. The NYT Opinion Twitter account also sent out the correction about the lack of a link, apologizing and saying that it appreciated that readers had pointed out the mistake.”

The suit charges the newspaper’s correction and apology to readers were “devoid of any reference to Mrs. Palin” and were “woefully insufficient.”

Palin is seeking damages to be determine by a jury, according to The Associated Press.

In a statement, a spokeswoman for The Times said, “We have not reviewed the claim yet but will defend against any claim vigorously.”

In the June 14 shooting at the ball field in Virginia, Rep. Steve Scalise was critically wounded. The House majority whip has since been released from the intensive care unit but remains at a Washington, D.C., hospital.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Today in Movie Culture: 'Baby Driver' Lego Trailer, 'Spider-Man: Homecoming' Starbucks Prank and More

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

Remade Trailer of the Day:

Baby Driver arrives in theaters tomorrow, so here’s a redo of the movie’s trailer in Lego:

[embedded content]

Movie Trivia of the Day:

Speaking of Edgar Wright, Screen Crush shares some Shaun of the Dead trivia:

[embedded content]

Movie Takedown of the Day:

Despicable Me 3 hits theaters this weekend, so of course Honest Trailers mocks the first two and lampoon’s the song “Happy”:

[embedded content]

Promotional Prank of the Day:

In anticipation of Spider-Man: Homecoming, the Marvel superhero dropped in to get coffee and surprise fans in this promotional stunt:

[embedded content]

Vintage Image of the Day:

Tobey Maguire, who turns 42 today, meets with Sam Raimi on the set of the 2004 sequel Spider-Man 2:

Bad Film Analysis of the Day:

Learn the supposed “hidden meaning” of Logan from an alien in the future in the latest episode of Earthling Cinema:

[embedded content]

Actor in the Spotlight:

The latest episode of character actor showcase No Small Parts focuses on Noah Taylor:

[embedded content]

Cosplay of the Day:

The Tampa Yankees hosted a tribute to the movie A League of Their Own and the women baseball players it portrays, and a couple little fans dressed up for the occasion:

3 Rockford Peaches in the house for A League of Their Own Tribute Night! Can you guess which one is an ORIGINAL peach?! ???? pic.twitter.com/H0m6gvV0Wi

— Tampa Yankees (@TampaYankees) June 24, 2017

Movie Food of the Day:

Actually beverages, not food, are the focus of the latest episode of Binging with Babish, which shows how to make memorabe cocktails featured in The Big Lebowski, Groundhog Day, the James Bond franchise and more:

[embedded content]

Classic Trailer of the Day:

Today is the 20th anniversary of John Woo’s Face/Off starring Nic Cage and John Travolta. Watch the original trailer for the action movie classic below.

[embedded content]

and

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Q&A: What Does The Senate Health Bill Mean For Me?

The ongoing debate over health care has many people wondering how changes will affect their coverage.

Fanatic Studio/Collection Mix: Sub/Getty Images

hide caption

toggle caption

Fanatic Studio/Collection Mix: Sub/Getty Images

Since Senate Republicans released the draft of their bill to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act last week, many people have been wondering how the proposed changes will affect their own coverage, and their family’s: Will my pre-existing condition be covered? Will my premiums go up or down?

The bill is still a work in progress, but we’ve taken a sampling of questions from All Things Considered listeners and answered them, based on what we know now.


Q: My husband and I are both in our 50s, self-employed, and we have a daughter in college. We buy insurance through the California exchange. Our family premium is now $1,100 a month with a deductible of $6,800 per person. We have never received a subsidy.

Three months ago, I was diagnosed with breast cancer. It was early stage, and I am in treatment with no cancer remaining. We are all very active and healthy otherwise.

Here is my concern: Based on what I have read, it appears our age group stands to see the biggest jump in premium costs. Not to mention, I now have a pre-existing condition. Will our premiums rise astronomically?

— Denise Estrada, Los Angeles, Calif.

A: This is a double-barreled question on premium costs and pre-existing conditions, both major concerns to consumers.

For a person in their 50s, worries about premium increases are well-founded. Under the Affordable Care Act, insurance companies are allowed to charge older people up to three times more than young people for the same insurance policies.

The Republican health care bills in both the Senate and House would allow insurers to charge up to five times more.

That change would likely lead to cheaper health plans for younger people, but also more expensive ones for those over 50. The Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that a 60-year-old in Los Angeles County who doesn’t qualify for subsidies would see her premium rise about $2,600 a year.

As for your question about your pre-existing condition, the answer would depend on where you live. The Senate bill does preserve the pre-existing condition protections that exist under the Affordable Care Act — meaning insurance companies must offer you a policy even if you have a medical problem. But it would also allow states to ask for waivers from some federal regulations, including those that define “essential health benefits.” If a state doesn’t include cancer treatment or pharmaceutical coverage in those benefits, then insurance companies can elect not to pay for some of the care you need.

Q: My 2 1/2-year-old son has been through eight hospitalizations and is fed partly through a feeding tube. We have insurance through my husband’s employer, and our son qualified for Medicaid last November because of a program in Pennsylvania for children with chronic illnesses.

The medical bills we’ve already seen would have been catastrophic without insurance, and our out-of-pocket medical expenses were thousands of dollars a year, even with insurance, before he qualified for Medicaid. His medical care needs have been so intense that I have not been able to work this past year.

We are very worried about his future care costs without Medicaid, as well as our ability to afford insurance coverage for him if pre-existing conditions are not afforded any legal protections.

How is Trumpcare likely to affect our family?

— Emily Kane, Pittsburgh, Pa.

A: It sounds like Pennsylvania’s Medicaid program has been helpful for your child. Under the proposed law, states will have even more power to design their own Medicaid programs, so there’s no reason to think that Pennsylvania would take away a local program that it has implemented.

What might be worrisome, however, are the overall reductions to the Medicaid program. The bill turns Medicaid from an open-ended program that pays for all the care beneficiaries need, to one that caps federal spending based on the number of people enrolled. The Congressional Budget Office predicts that if the Senate bill passes, Medicaid spending would be 26 percent lower, over the next decade, than it would be under the Affordable Care Act.

Some analysts believe that over time, states will have to cut services, reduce how much they pay doctors and hospitals and make it harder to qualify for Medicaid.

Q: My wife and I are both 42, and we have two children, ages 10 and 13. We have coverage through the marketplace but do not qualify for payment assistance. In addition, my wife has rheumatoid arthritis and currently uses expensive monthly injections to treat it. Would insurance still be required to cover my wife’s arthritis treatment under the new law? And how would our premiums be affected?

— Jeremy Merrill, Cedar Park, Texas

A: As far as premiums go, it looks like yours are likely to remain about the same. The Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that for a 40-year-old in Williamson County, Texas, who doesn’t qualify for subsidies, premiums are flat under the new law.

Whether your insurance will cover your wife’s condition depends largely on your governor. As I explained above, states can ask for waivers from many of the Affordable Care Act’s consumer protections, including those that define what medical services insurers have to cover.

Q: My 16-year-old daughter has Crohn’s disease. She requires Remicade infusions every six weeks. Each infusion costs $20,000. I am very concerned about lifetime maximums being reinstated. Additionally, I worry that children will no longer be able to stay on their parents’ insurance policies until 26, and that pre-existing conditions will result in higher premiums, even for employer-sponsored plans.

— Amy Lowe, Dayton, Ohio

A: You only have to worry about one of those things.

The Senate bill does include the very popular provision in the Affordable Care Act that allows children to stay on their parents’ health insurance policy until they are 26.

However, there is a chance that lifetime spending limits and annual limits [to what an insurer would pay for the care of a given patient] could return. Before the Affordable Care Act, about 60 percent of employers had lifetime limits on their health plans. The section of the bill that allows states to get waivers from federal rules opens the door to those limits making a comeback — even in employer-sponsored policies.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Supreme Court To Consider New Jersey's Bid To Legalize Sports Betting

New Jersey’s bid to offer legalized sports betting is going to the Supreme Court. The state wants to allow legal sports betting in its casinos and racetracks, but major league sports are united in their opposition.

ARI SHAPIRO, HOST:

New Jersey has been pushing to legalize sports betting at casinos and racetracks, and today the Supreme Court announced it would hear the case. It could be the undoing of a federal ban on sports betting in most states that goes back to 1993. Charles Lane of member station WSHU says the sports and gaming industries are watching this case closely and preparing for a future that might look very different.

CHARLES LANE, BYLINE: Ted Taylor works in a pub in Connecticut that is perfectly positioned if sports betting is legalized.

TED TAYLOR: They can watch whatever they want, including about 30 different sports channels on the television. And there’s a little pad there. If they don’t want to move, they can just place their bets on the pad.

LANE: Taylor is an executive at Sportech, a British gambling company that bought 16 off-track betting parlors in Connecticut and is poised to do the same in California. OTBs are a struggling industry, but this one is built to be a sports fan’s paradise. It’s all dark wood walls, saloon-style doors, 197 TVs and plenty of cashiers nearby for betters. Right now Taylor only takes bets on racing and highline, but he’s ready for traditional sports.

TAYLOR: When it’s legal, this would be a natural place for that to happen. But I’ve got to emphasize how important it is that everybody feels that that’s got to be regulated properly.

LANE: It’s not just betting parlors, either. Seven states have already moved legislation in preparation for legal sports betting even though the Supreme Court has only just decided to consider it. But from the gaming industry perspective, repealing the ban is a foregone conclusion. Geoff Freeman is president of the American Gaming Association.

GEOFF FREEMAN: Sports leagues, the casino gaming industry, the state’s broadcasters and many others have said it’s time to take a different approach to this complex issue.

LANE: Sport leagues have been the traditional opponent to repealing the ban. John Holden is a legal scholar at Florida State University who studies sports. He says leagues have been concerned about the integrity of their games.

JOHN HOLDEN: Legalized gambling might increase instances of match fixing or gambling corruption.

LANE: But leagues have increasingly begun to soften their stance and form partnerships that could capitalize on legal sports betting. The NFL, NHL, NBA – all of them have deals with data companies that watch for suspicious bets.

HOLDEN: However, these companies also provide the data that sportsbooks use to set lines. So while they provide sort of this integrity monitoring service, they’re also helping those operate betting businesses.

LANE: He says it’s not inconceivable that a sports team could own its own sportsbook. More likely, though, we’ll see new entrants into the sports gambling market. David Katz is a gaming analyst for Telsey Advisory Group. He says businesses like the horseracing company Churchill Downs or the investment bank Cantor Fitzgerald already have products ready to go.

DAVID KATZ: The technology that they use is translatable into a sports betting platform quite easily.

LANE: There’s even more surprising possibilities. Microsoft has technology that has been learning how to bet on sports, and the videogame division of Sony has a gambling patent which has some speculating if betting on video game sports could be legal as well. For NPR News, I’m Charles Lane, WSHU news.

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

Today in Movie Culture: Spider-Man vs. Batman, ‘Gremlins’ is Weirder Than You Remember and More

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

Mashup of the Day:

Three different incarnations of Spider-Man battle three different incarnation of Batman in Alex Luthor’s latest fan-made crossover:

[embedded content]

Franchise Recap of the Day:

Speaking of Spider-Man, with Homecoming out next week, here’s a recap of the superhero’s movie history in rap form:

[embedded content]

Movie Takedown of the Day:

For Cracked and Obsessive Pop Culture Disorder, Daniel O’Brien makes some great points about why Gremlins is a very weird movie:

[embedded content]

Vintage Image of the Day:

Paul Thomas Anderson, who turns 47 today, directs Heather Graham on the set of Boogie Nights in 1996:

Filmmakers in Focus:

In this video from the Royal Ocean Film Society, filmmakers including Steven Spielberg, Steven Soderbergh and Billy Wilder talk about their worst movies:

[embedded content]

Supercut of the Day:

Speaking of the bad parts of our favorite movies, here’s a supercut of Luke Skywalker whining and complaining in the original Star Wars:

[embedded content]

Filmmaking Lesson of the Day:

Ever wonder what all the people in the movie credits do? Filmmaker IQ’s John Hess explains the different above the line and below the line jobs:

[embedded content]

Cosplay of the Day:

In honor of today being the 20th anniversary of the Harry Potter books, here’s a cat cosplaying as the boy wizard:

Genre Showcase of the Day:

Learn all about the martial arts film genre Wuxia in this video introduction from Fandor:

[embedded content]

Classic Trailer of the Day:

Today is the 30th anniversary of the limited release of Stanley Kubrick’s Full Metal Jacket. Watch the original trailer for the classic war film below.

[embedded content]

and

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

GOP Sen. Susan Collins Plans To Oppose Senate Health Bill After CBO Report

The Congressional Budget Office said Monday 22 million more people would be uninsured over the next decade under the Senate health care bill. Maine Sen. Collins later said she would oppose the bill.

ARI SHAPIRO, HOST:

The Supreme Court’s announcement that it would take up the travel ban is one thing that makes this a big week for President Trump – another, Senate Republicans’ effort to pass a replacement to the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, by July Fourth. NPR national political correspondent Mara Liasson joins us from the White House to talk about that. Hi, Mara.

MARA LIASSON, BYLINE: Hi, Ari.

SHAPIRO: Let’s start with the score that just came out this afternoon from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office which says 22 million more people would be uninsured over the next decade under the Senate legislation. Tell us more about what the CBO says.

LIASSON: The CBO says that that amount will lose coverage over the next decade. That’s almost identical to their scoring of the House bill. They also talk about how premiums will go up for lower-income, older, poorer Americans. And the White House immediately issued a statement attacking the CBO, saying it’s proven that in the past that it’s incapable of predicting insurance coverage. But this is a blow to the bill, and the president promised several times that under his watch, health care would get cheaper, better, and there would be no Medicaid cuts. And so far, the Senate bill does not live up to those criteria.

SHAPIRO: And just in the hours since the CBO score came out, we’ve already seen reactions from some senators who might have been on the fence before. Tell us what’s happening here.

LIASSON: That’s right. We know that Susan Collins is the first Republican senator to come out and say definitively she is a no vote. She says she will vote no on the motion to proceed, which is the procedural rule that allows the bill to go to the floor. She’s a moderate senator from Maine. It’s a rural state, and as she said in some tweets, it has a lot of vulnerable Americans. And a lot of Mainers are on Medicaid. I think she said something like 1 in 5 residents of Maine are on Medicaid, and she’s worried about those deep cuts.

There’s a pool of other senators who have expressed reservations – Dean Heller of Nevada, Rand Paul of Kentucky, Mike Lee of Utah. Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader in the Senate, can only afford to lose two senators to pass this bill. And so he’s already lost one with Susan Collins, and we’re really watching those other senators.

SHAPIRO: So walk us through the political strategy here. Mitch McConnell has said it is so important to him to have a vote this week before the July Fourth recess, but if the votes aren’t there, could there be reason for him to postpone a vote, let people go home and come back when they’ve had more time to think about it?

LIASSON: They could, but part of his strategy was to not do that because if they go home, they’re going to face a lot of angry constituents the way they did in the previous breaks. And he doesn’t want that to happen because it might be even harder for him to get the votes when they come back.

One of the things that he’s telling them is, look; every Republican has promised for seven years to repeal Obamacare. This is it. This is the only bill that you’re going to get a chance to vote for that does that. If you don’t do that, you are going to anger the base of the Republican Party, and it will be impossible for us to proceed with anything else, any other priorities for Republicans like tax reform.

He’s also going to tell them that Medicaid is going to be transformed. That is a – would be a generational achievement for conservatives. This is something they’ve wanted to do for a very long time – is, you know, shrink entitlements. And he’s going to try to sell it to them. He also has a pot of money to bargain with. He might tell Susan Collins he’ll put more money in for opioid abuse or rural health care. Mitch McConnell is legendary for being somebody who can get the votes, keep his Republicans together. This is a big challenge for him, but most people think he has a few more cards up his sleeve.

SHAPIRO: You talked about Susan Collins. Tell us about Dean Heller of Nevada, who’s another interesting player in this debate.

LIASSON: Yeah, Dean Heller is a really interesting player because he’s the only Republican from a state that Clinton won who’s up for re-election in 2018. He came out on Friday at a press conference with the governor of his state saying – he practically said he was a no. And a pro-Trump super PAC has threatened to run a million-dollar ad buy against Heller in his own state. He’s already facing a tremendous amount of social media and advertising from people who want him to vote to save Obamacare. So he’s really being hit from the right and the left. We also hear he might want to run for governor in 2018, and maybe he’s not so concerned about the pushback from his fellow Senate Republicans.

SHAPIRO: NPR’s Mara Liasson, thank you.

LIASSON: Thank you.

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

Facial Recognition May Boost Airport Security But Raises Privacy Worries

Charles Camiel looks into the camera for a facial recognition test before boarding his JetBlue flight to Aruba at Logan International Airport in Boston.

Robin Lubbock/WBUR

hide caption

toggle caption

Robin Lubbock/WBUR

Passengers at Boston’s Logan International Airport were surfing their phones and drinking coffee, waiting to board a flight to Aruba recently when a JetBlue agent came on the loudspeaker, announcing: “Today, we do have a unique way of boarding.”

On flights to the Caribbean island, JetBlue is experimenting with facial recognition software that acts as a boarding pass. The airline says it’s about convenience. For the federal government, it’s also about national security. But for privacy activists, it’s an intrusive form of surveillance.

This is the first trial between an airline and Customs and Border Protection to use facial recognition in place of boarding passes.

“The practical side of that is you will not need to show a boarding pass and you will not need to take your passport out because your face will be essentially your boarding pass,” says Joanna Geraghty, JetBlue’s executive vice president of customer experience.

Michelle Moynihan, who was flying to Aruba for a wedding, says facial recognition would make her life easier.

“Typically when I travel I have my three kids with me and I travel alone with them,” she says. “They’re all under age 10, so flipping through multiple boarding passes on my phone, making sure I have all the kids, all the backpacks, all the suitcases can be cumbersome and frustrating.”

Moynihan gets in line and right before she gets to the jet bridge, there’s a camera that’s about the size of a shoebox. It takes her photo and she gets a checkmark, saying she’s good to go.

The whole process takes about 5 to 6 seconds.

“We’re basically capturing that picture at the boarding gate and then providing it to U.S. Customs and Border protection,” says Sean Farrell, who works for SITA, the company running this technology. SITA provides a lot of the IT infrastructure you see at airports.

“It’s actually the U.S. government that’s implementing the biometric matching system,” he says.

The government uses existing databases to compare a traveler’s face against all the other passengers on the flight manifest.

JetBlue is pitching this idea of facial recognition as convenience for customers. It’s voluntary. But it’s also part of a broader push by Customs and Border Protection to create a biometric exit system to track non-U.S. citizens leaving the country.

After the Sept. 11 attacks, there was a lot of talk about the necessity of a biometric exit system, but the tech and computing power just wasn’t good enough. Now, facial recognition experts say it’s more accurate.

And Farrell sees a future — not too far off — where our faces could be our IDs.

“The end game is that in a few years’ time you’ll be able to go through the airport basically just using your face,” he says. “If you have bags to drop off, you’ll be able to use the self-service system and just have your face captured and matched. You’ll then go to security, the same thing. … And then you go to the boarding gate, and again just use your biometric.”

But that worries people like Adam Schwartz, a lawyer with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit digital rights group. He says facial recognition is a uniquely invasive form of surveillance.

“We can change our bank account numbers, we even can change our names, but we cannot change our faces,” Schwartz says. “And once the information is out there, it could be misused.”

Kade Crockford, director of the Technology for Liberty Program at the ACLU of Massachusetts, says she’s particularly concerned by the JetBlue program because of the government’s role.

“The biometric databases that the government is amassing are simply another tool, and a very powerful tool of government control,” she says.

Customs and Border Protection insists it will discard facial recognition photos taken of U.S. citizens at the airport, and only keep a database of non-U.S. citizens.

Back at Logan Airport, passenger Yeimy Quezada feels totally comfortable sharing her face instead of a barcode.

“Even your cellphone recognizes selfies and recognize faces, so I’m used to that technology already,” she says. “And, I’m not concerned about privacy because I’m a firm believer that if you’re not hiding anything, you shouldn’t be afraid of anything.”

Customs is running similar biometric tests at airports in Atlanta, New York and the Washington, D.C., area. The goal is to deploy facial recognition tech widely by early next year.

Asma Khalid leadsWBUR’s BostonomiX team, which covers the people, startups and companies driving the innovation economy. You can follow them@BostonomiX.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)