WordPress database error: [The table 'wp_yoast_indexable' is full]UPDATE `wp_yoast_indexable` SET `object_id` = '2568', `object_type` = 'term', `object_sub_type` = 'post_tag', `permalink` = 'http://virusreports.net/tag/partial/', `blog_id` = '1', `primary_focus_keyword_score` = NULL, `is_robots_noindex` = NULL, `is_public` = NULL, `open_graph_image` = NULL, `open_graph_image_id` = NULL, `open_graph_image_source` = NULL, `open_graph_image_meta` = NULL, `twitter_image` = NULL, `twitter_image_id` = NULL, `twitter_image_source` = NULL, `canonical` = NULL, `primary_focus_keyword` = NULL, `title` = NULL, `description` = NULL, `readability_score` = NULL, `inclusive_language_score` = NULL, `breadcrumb_title` = 'Partial', `open_graph_title` = NULL, `open_graph_description` = NULL, `twitter_title` = NULL, `twitter_description` = NULL, `is_cornerstone` = '0', `is_robots_nofollow` = NULL, `is_robots_noarchive` = NULL, `is_robots_noimageindex` = NULL, `is_robots_nosnippet` = NULL, `object_published_at` = '2020-04-28 03:28:47', `object_last_modified` = '2020-07-23 18:22:00', `version` = '2', `permalink_hash` = '36:6a7ccd1363dab2e0e8631f1649cc29f5', `updated_at` = '2026-09-05 14:28:27' WHERE `id` = '32472'
WordPress database error: [The table 'wp_yoast_indexable' is full]UPDATE `wp_yoast_indexable` SET `object_id` = '2568', `object_type` = 'term', `object_sub_type` = 'post_tag', `permalink` = 'http://virusreports.net/tag/partial/', `blog_id` = '1', `primary_focus_keyword_score` = NULL, `is_robots_noindex` = NULL, `is_public` = NULL, `open_graph_image` = NULL, `open_graph_image_id` = NULL, `open_graph_image_source` = NULL, `open_graph_image_meta` = NULL, `twitter_image` = NULL, `twitter_image_id` = NULL, `twitter_image_source` = NULL, `canonical` = NULL, `primary_focus_keyword` = NULL, `title` = NULL, `description` = NULL, `readability_score` = NULL, `inclusive_language_score` = NULL, `breadcrumb_title` = 'Partial', `open_graph_title` = NULL, `open_graph_description` = NULL, `twitter_title` = NULL, `twitter_description` = NULL, `is_cornerstone` = '0', `is_robots_nofollow` = NULL, `is_robots_noarchive` = NULL, `is_robots_noimageindex` = NULL, `is_robots_nosnippet` = NULL, `object_published_at` = '2020-04-28 03:28:47', `object_last_modified` = '2020-07-23 18:22:00', `version` = '2', `permalink_hash` = '36:6a7ccd1363dab2e0e8631f1649cc29f5', `updated_at` = '2026-09-05 14:28:27' WHERE `id` = '32472'
The post Top Dems reject any partial deals on coronavirus relief: ‘We cannot piecemeal this’ appeared first on Virus Reports.
]]>House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer said Thursday they would not accept any partial extensions or attempt to break coronavirus relief into smaller packages.
“We cannot piecemeal this. It has an integrity. It has a oneness about meeting the needs of the American people, defeating the virus,” Mrs. Pelosi, California Democrat, said.
The two top Democrats on Capitol Hill also slammed Republicans’ handling of negotiations so far, arguing the GOP is in disarray over the package.
“Now that Senate Republicans have finally woken up to the calamity in our country, they have been so divided, so disorganized, so unprepared that they have struggled to even draft a partisan proposal within their own conference,” Mr. Schumer, New York Democrat, said. “They can’t come together. Even after all this time, it appears the Republican legislative response to COVID is un-unified, un-serious, un-satisfactory.”
“They’re so divided and there’s no leadership from the president,” Mr. Schumer added.
Their comments come after the White House and Senate Republicans announced Wednesday night they had a deal on this next coronavirus package, but no proposal has been announced as of Thursday morning.
Several Republicans have broken rank over concerns about the high cost of the package — expected to exceed $1 trillion — how the party is going to address expiring boosted unemployment benefits, and funds to hard-hit state and local governments.
With the extra $600 a week unemployment benefits, as well as a few other COVID-19 provisions including eviction protection, are set to expire this month — putting pressure on lawmakers to meet those deadlines.
Republicans are concerned the supercharged unemployment benefits will incentivize some to stay out of work, but don’t want the aid to entirely lapse as lawmakers continue to negotiate on a larger package.
There were reports Wednesday that the GOP was debating a short-term extension on the $600 a week since many could agree on an exact number.
“I’d prefer we would find a solution for it,” Sen. Marco Rubio, Florida Republican, told reporters. “It would depend on how long that extension is for, if it is for two more weeks…that might be something I consider, but if it’s something longer than that I think we really need to focus on the solution — on the sort of fix that takes into account potential disadvantage to return to work and the fact that some have no work to return to.”
Treasury Secretary Steven T. Mnuchin said Thursday the White House is looking at approximately 70% wage replacement.
There’s been chatter amongst GOP senators about passing a temporary unemployment benefits extension as they work out the mechanics of a final deal.
Democrats, meanwhile, are committed to extending the full $600 a week payments, but Mrs. Pelosi also wants to see what Republicans have to offer on direct payments to the public.
“I’m all for the $600 because people really need it,” she said. “But again, as I said, we have issues that relate to direct payments for people and the size of what that is and the rest. But I go to the table with the commitment to the $600.”
Though a final GOP proposal hasn’t been released, their plan is expected to include $105 billion for schools and $16 billion for testing. Republicans are also working on another round of funding for small business loans in the Paycheck Protection Program, with potential new limitations on who can apply.
Mr. Schumer and Mrs. Pelosi, however, said they couldn’t comment on any specific numbers or begin negotiating until the Republicans have a plan on paper.
The post Top Dems reject any partial deals on coronavirus relief: ‘We cannot piecemeal this’ appeared first on Virus Reports.
]]>The post Partial Win For Gun Regulation At Supreme Court Could Be Short Lived appeared first on Virus Reports.
]]>
The U.S. Supreme Court has once again punted on the question of gun rights, throwing out as moot a challenge to New York City’s strict gun regulations on transporting licensed guns outside the home.
New York City, in the name of public safety, has very strict gun regulations. It allows people to have a permit for guns in their homes, but those regulations originally barred people from transporting their guns anywhere except shooting ranges within the city. The New York State Rifle & Pistol Association challenged the regulation as a violation of the Second Amendment right to bear arms and lost in the lower courts.
But, after the Supreme Court agreed to review the case, New York state and New York City changed their laws to allow gun owners to transport their guns outside the city to shooting ranges, to competitions, and to second homes. That gave the challengers exactly what they asked for in their lawsuit, and so on Monday, the court, by a 6-to-3 vote, dismissed the case as moot–in short, it no longer presented a live controversy.
The unsigned opinion was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court’s four liberals, and Trump appointee Brett Kavanaugh.
But Kavanaugh wrote separately to stress that while he agreed with the majority on procedural grounds, he agreed with the dissenters–Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Neil Gorsuch–on one key issue.
Those three said that the lower courts were using the wrong test to evaluate gun laws, a test that is far too deferential to gun regulators. The dissenters mainly argued however, that the court essentially had been gamed on the mootness question, and that the justices should have decided the case, and decided it for the gun owners.
Gun-safety advocates breathed a sigh of relief that there was no decision adverse to gun regulations. But they worry that gains they are making in some state legislatures may be taken away by a conservative court majority.
“The reality is that the gun-safety movement is winning in state houses and at the ballot box, so the NRA is turning to the court to try to change the tide,” says Eric Tirschwell, managing mirector of Everytown for Gun Safety.
Monday’s decision was the first in a major gun case in 10 years, the first since a landmark set of decisions in 2008 and 2010. In those cases, a sharply divided court ruled that the Second Amendment right to bear arms is an individual right, not a right associated with the militia, as the court had previously implied. Those decisions marked a huge victory for the NRA and other gun-rights organizations.
In the decade following that decision, however, the court did not agree to hear any of the dozens of challenges to gun restrictions in cases appealed to the court. In part because the composition of the court made outcomes uncertain.
The previous big gun cases were decided by 5-to-4 votes, with Justice Anthony Kennedy casting the fifth and decisive vote. Kennedy, according to court sources, insisted, as the price of his vote, on adding limiting language that likely would have resulted in some, maybe even most, gun restrictions being upheld. With neither side of the court sure how Kennedy would vote on most regulations, neither the pro-gun, nor the pro-gun-control side wanted to risk an adverse ruling.
That changed when Kennedy retired in 2018 to be replaced by Justice Kavanaugh, who has a much more gun-friendly record than Kennedy did.
Nothing Kavanaugh said in his concurring opinion Monday would dissuade anyone from thinking he has changed his mind.
Bottom line here is that when it comes to gun control, there look to be four pretty solid votes against a lot of the measures enacted in recent years after mass shootings. Specifically, laws that bar carrying weapons in public places, and bans on assault weapons and large ammo magazines. All these, plus so called red-flag laws and other measures could be in jeopardy.
The question is where Chief Justice Roberts will be on these and other gun-control questions. To date, he has never been much of a supporter of gun-control laws, but he hasn’t been an outspoken opponent, either. All we really know is that he was part of the 2008 and 2010 majority that for the first time declared that the Second Amendment is an individual right, not, as the court had previously implied, a collective right that was attached to the colonial militia.
The post Partial Win For Gun Regulation At Supreme Court Could Be Short Lived appeared first on Virus Reports.
]]>