Connect with us

Politics

News sketch: The role of the army in Algerian politics – FRANCE 24

Published

on

Politics

Campaigniacs podcast- Episode 2: Women in Sask. politics – Regina Leader-Post

Published

on


Article content

Saskatchewan voters will go to the polls on Oct. 26 to choose a provincial government. Join the Campaigniacs — a team of journalists from the Regina Leader-Post and the Saskatoon StarPhoenix — in a podcast series that will follow along with the election campaign.

This week, the team is joined by CBC Saskatchewan’s Morning Edition host Stefani Langenegger to discuss the role federal politics are playing in the provincial election. Also in this episode, Lindsay Brumwell from Equal Voice and retiring NDP MLA Danielle Chartier on how to get more women involved in provincial politics. Listen to Campaigniacs on the Leader-Post and StarPhoenix websites or on Apple Podcasts, Spotify,Google Podcasts and Stitcher.



The Campaigniacs (left-to-right): Arthur White-Crummey: Legislature reporter, Regina Leader-Post. Murray Mandryk: Political columnist, Leader-Post, Saskatoon StarPhoenix. Phil Tank: Provincial affairs reporter, StarPhoenix.

More On This Topic

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Hahn pledges no politics in COVID vaccine decisions – Regulatory Focus

Published

on


Posted 23 September 2020 | By Michael Mezher 

Testifying before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee on Wednesday, US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Stephen Hahn said that politics will not play a part in the decision to approve or authorize a vaccine for coronavirus disease (COVID-19).
 
Hahn stressed that he supports science and has “100% confidence” in his staff, and said that, “FDA will not authorize or approve any COVID-19 vaccine before it has met the agency’s rigorous expectations for safety and effectiveness.”
 
“There won’t be politics that play any part in that decision,” Hahn added.
 
Hahn’s reassurances come amid reports from the Washington Post, Financial Times and New York Times that the agency is preparing to issue guidance on its expectations for a COVID-19 vaccine EUA that will ask for a median two months of monitoring after Phase 3 trial participants receive their last dose, making an EUA for a vaccine before the election unlikely.
 
Hahn and Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) Director Peter Marks have both previously said that such guidance is coming but have not expressly disclosed what it would entail. (RELATED: Marks, Hahn confirm COVID vaccine EUA guidance coming, Regulatory Focus 11 September 2020).
 
The news of more stringent EUA guidance for vaccines follows criticism of the agency’s handling of previous EUAs for COVID-19 therapeutics, including the recent one issued for convalescent plasma and the now-revoked authorization for hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine. (RELATED: Lawmakers, experts raise questions after convalescent plasma EUA, Regulatory Focus 25 August 2020; FDA revokes EUA for hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, Regulatory Focus 15 June 2020).
 
During the hearing, Hahn said that vaccine makers will be the ones to decide when to submit data to FDA and whether to seek full approval or an EUA for their vaccine. “This will be based upon the trial meeting prespecified success criteria that were established by that sponsor … they should also be consistent with FDA recommendations regarding those criteria,” he said.
 
While Hahn did not touch on any specifics raised in the recent news reports, he said that companies will have to demonstrate that they have met the statutory standards for an EUA.
 
“We expect that this would be demonstrated based on adequate manufacturing data to ensure a vaccine’s quality and consistency and data from at least one well-designed Phase 3 clinical trial that demonstrates its safety and efficacy in a clear and compelling manner,” Hahn said, adding that the agency will expect EUA requests to include a plan for long-term safety monitoring for individuals who receive the vaccine.
 
Hearing

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Essential Politics: The domino effect of Ginsburg's death – Los Angeles Times

Published

on


Good morning and welcome to our newest edition of the Essential Politics newsletter. I’m Laura Blasey, an editor on the newsletters team, and I’m writing to you from The Times’ Washington bureau.

Each Wednesday, we’ll bring you the best work from The Times’ state, national politics and election teams, stories that will take you beyond breaking news. Don’t worry — we’ll continue to send you smart analyses from our Sacramento and Washington bureau chiefs on Mondays and Fridays. This new edition will offer another angle, so you won’t miss a thing on the road to November and beyond.

This week’s big story: The death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Friday has opened a new front in an already contentious presidential election and a new conflict between congressional Republicans and Democrats. President Trump and Joe Biden aren’t the only ones vying for a win in November. Nor is the only question which man should be the one to name her replacement. Times reporters Janet Hook and Jennifer Haberkorn write that, like a chain of dominoes, the showdown over the vacancy could have ramifications that ripple and reshape Senate races as partisan lines harden among voters. Let’s get started.

Newsletter

Get our Essential Politics newsletter

The latest news, analysis and insights from our politics teams from Sacramento to D.C.

You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.

Advertisement

A court vacancy’s fallout

By November, voters will choose a president and which party controls the Senate. Republicans now hold 53 seats, while Democrats have 45, plus two seats held by independents who caucus with them. With 35 seats up for grabs, most of them held by Republicans, the majority is very much at stake.

The outcome remains unpredictable and tied to Trump’s fate: Many Republicans will prevail or fall with him. In politically polarized times, fewer voters than ever are inclined to pick a president from one party and a senator from another. And few issues could be more polarizing than a debate over replacing a Supreme Court justice, especially when early voting for the next president has begun.

“It’s another wild card,” Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, a member of the Senate Republican leadership, told The Times. “It certainly is something that our candidates — and the candidates on both sides, for that matter — are going to have to manage, because both sides are going to be heavily invested in the outcome of this decision.”

Hook and Haberkorn write about how the Republicans’ at-risk senators are maneuvering in the wake of Ginsburg’s passing. Susan Collins of Maine and Cory Gardner of Colorado must woo centrist and independent voters in states that lean to the left, a delicate task that had them focusing on less divisive local issues until this week. Meanwhile, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Joni Ernst of Iowa, among others, are locked in tight races in states where Trump remains popular; they need to energize their states’ voters on the right. There’s also Doug Jones, the lone Democrat up for reelection in a conservative state, Alabama, now more endangered than before.

Advertisement

Another issue is at play in the court battle: healthcare, a core part of the Democratic platform, especially amid the pandemic. The court is due to take up a case pivotal to the future of the Affordable Care Act just a week after the election.

Still, even among those in tough reelection fights, Republicans see far more to be gained by sticking with the president and supporting his bid to fill the court seat as soon as possible. If they back away from him, they fear, they will lose conservative voters without picking up many liberal ones, Hook and Haberkorn wrote. Collins is the only Republican up for reelection who has said Trump should not pick a nominee before the election; the second party defector, Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, is not on the ballot.

Enjoying this newsletter? Consider subscribing to the Los Angeles Times

Your support helps us deliver the news that matters most. Become a subscriber.

The view from the Supreme Court

— President Trump said Monday he is likely to name a replacement for Ginsburg on Saturday. Senate Republicans appear increasingly likely to have the votes needed to confirm his choice, barring some revelation, Haberkorn writes. On Tuesday, Trump critic Mitt Romney joined his party colleagues in saying he is willing to consider Trump’s nominee, regardless of the looming election.

Advertisement

— In 2016, nine full months before that year’s presidential election, Republicans argued that a vote on Obama’s Supreme Court nominee would deprive Americans of the chance to have a say in who should fill the seat. Arit John compared their statements then and now and found that when it comes to being consistent, several Senate Republicans are not.

— Biden, having served in the Senate for decades, knows the thorny politics of Supreme Court nominations perhaps better than anyone, writes Melanie Mason. He not only helped shepherd Ginsburg’s nomination in 1993, he was involved in at least 14 others.

— ICYMI: Del Quentin Wilber took a look at Trump’s likely finalists, Amy Coney Barrett and Barbara Lagoa. Both would push the court further to the right.

From The Times archives

The front page of the Los Angeles Times on June 15, 1993.

(Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

The battle to replace Ginsburg stands in stark contrast to her nomination and confirmation. In June 1993, the political climate surrounding the court was less charged, and Ginsburg’s reputation was as a centrist judge, not the liberal icon she became. The Times announced her nomination with the headline “Clinton Picks Moderate Judge Ruth Ginsburg for High Court.” The Times’ David Savage wrote in his analysis that Ginsburg was considered “an articulate moderate jurist.” She came with support from Justice Antonin Scalia, who reportedly quipped that if he had to spend the rest of his life on a desert island with a liberal, he’d choose her.

Weeks later, on Aug. 4, The Times reported she’d been approved “swiftly and with remarkably little dissension” by a Senate vote of 96-3 — “the most agreeable Supreme Court confirmation process in recent history.” Three Republicans voted against her over her pro-abortion-rights stance.

The latest from the campaign trail

— Unlike most states, Maine and Nebraska can split their electoral votes, awarding a vote to the winner in each House district. That has made one rural congressional district in Maine into a tiny battleground for the Biden and Trump campaigns, Janet Hook writes.

— From 2020 reporters Evan Halper and Seema Mehta: With the help of lots of cash from Californians, including past Republican donors, Joe Biden is eclipsing President Trump in fundraising as they head into the final stretch.

Advertisement

Cindy McCain has endorsed Biden for president. It’s a stunning rebuke of President Trump by the widow of the Republican Party’s 2008 nominee.

— The first debate is Tuesday. White House reporters Eli Stokols and Noah Bierman report that Trump and Biden are taking very different approaches to preparing.

The view from California

— Gov. Gavin Newsom on Monday defended his efforts to fix an outdated state unemployment benefits system that has delayed payments to tens of thousands of Californians who have lost their jobs since the COVID-19 pandemic began.

— L.A. County’s Project Roomkey, a $100-million-plus program to repurpose hotels and motels emptied by the coronavirus as safe havens for homeless people, is ending after months of mixed performance. An official said the program is being squeezed by uncertain funding from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which pays about 75% of its cost.

Advertisement

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending