California, once hailed as the ultimate dream destination with its sunny beaches, vibrant cities, and booming economy, is witnessing a significant shift. In recent years, a growing number of residents are opting to leave the Golden State. This mass exodus raises the question: why does no one want to live in California anymore? The reasons are multifaceted, involving economic, social, and environmental factors that have altered the allure of this iconic state.
Showing posts with label California. Show all posts
Showing posts with label California. Show all posts
Monday CA School Walkout Against COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates
Parents organized to keep their children home from school Monday to oppose Gov. Gavin Newsom's COVID-19 vaccine mandates.
Parents who oppose Gov. Gavin Newsom's vaccine and mask mandates for schoolchildren are organizing a statewide school walkout for Monday.
School districts and families across California are making plans to deal with the peaceful protest.
The protest is the latest move by parents and voters dissatisfied with both on-campus mask-wearing and vaccine mandates in California schools.
Here are five things you need to know about the upcoming California school walkouts.
1. The statewide walkout (also called a "sit out" on social media flyers) encourages California parents to keep their children home Monday. The flyer asked parents not to call their child in sick or otherwise excuse the absence to keep schools from reaping average daily attendance funds from the state.
2. The walkout affects elementary, middle and high schools. The walkout also calls upon California teachers and other district employees to stay home from work Monday. "Parents and concerned citizens all over CA are taking action against the forced COVID-19 vaccine mandate for our children in state schools. We demand parental choice over the bodily autonomy of our children," one Twitter flyer said.
3. The protest is a response to Newsom's state mandate Friday in which he made California the first state in the nation to require all children attending in-person instruction at every school to get vaccinated against COVID-19. California residents could see the enforcement of this mandate as early as January. Since the Food and Drug Administration has not authorized COVID-19 vaccines for children under 12, it will affect students in grades seven through 12 to start. Any student who refuses to take the vaccine will be forced to complete an independent study program at home, officials said.
4. California will also require teachers to be vaccinated or tested weekly, effective Friday. Some educators against the mandate will participate in Monday's walkout, forcing some campuses —including Oak Run Elementary in Shasta County — to close, CalMatters reported Friday. Los Angeles Unified School District, one of the state's largest, vowed to prohibit teachers from returning to classrooms on Monday if they do not receive at least one vaccine dose by Friday.
5. Across California, 50,896,327 vaccine doses have been administered, and 71.7 percent of Californians are fully vaccinated, CalMatters reported. As of Wednesday, California had 4,565,279 confirmed cases of COVID-19 (up 0.1 percent from Tuesday), and 70,010 COVID-19 related deaths (up 0.2 percent from Tuesday), the report said.
Intel ACCEPTS Antibodies as a Full Substitute For Vaccination
Intel ACCEPTS antibodies as a full substitute for vaccination!
Tech manufacturing giant INTEL is resisting vaccine mandates.
They even allow antibodies from prior infection to count as a full substitute for vaccination for people who must quarantine after a Covid exposure or for travel requirements.
Intel's rational, moral C19 vax policies: vaxxed employees cannot say they do not want to work with unwaxed employees; FORBIDS managers from asking for vax status; ACCEPTS antibodies as a full substitute for vax for people who must quarantine after a C19 exposure or for travel
Their lawyers know what the future holds.
Finally a company with (excuse my wording) balls. This along with the airline industry employees, I want to say thank you.
1/ Intel's rational, moral C19 vax policies: vaxed employees cannot say they do not want to work with unvaxed employees; FORBIDS managers from asking for vax status; ACCEPTS antibodies as a full substitute for vax for people who must quarantine after a C19 exposure or for travel
— Andrew Bostom, MD, MS (@andrewbostom) October 12, 2021
Intel does not require covid19 vaccinations for its workforce.
— Truth Post (@truthp0st) October 12, 2021
Hint: It’s arguably the most science-driven of all.
Alex Berenson pic.twitter.com/MA3XK3csGe
California's Insane Plans for a Covid Vaccine Mandate for Kids
The question was: how are these vaccines different than other vaccines kids get before going to school?
Here are three answers:
1) Mechanism of action: the mRNA vaccines do not look or work like almost all other vaccines, which are far simpler biologically.
Most vaccines present an inactivated or attenuated viral particle to the immune system so that it can react to the "dead" virus as it would to the live virus. The mRNA and DNA/AAV vaccines instead hijack our own cells and cause them to make a piece of the Sars-Cov-2 virus to jumpstart our immune system.
It is now clear that this process carries significant risks - and more importantly, does not lead to the breadth or longevity of immune system response as normal infection with Sars-Cov-2.
“While vaccination gives rise to memory B cells that evolve over a few weeks, natural infection births memory B cells that continue to evolve over several months, producing highly potent antibodies adept at eliminating even viral variants.
The findings highlight an advantage bestowed by natural infection rather than vaccination.”
2) Duration of protection: the Covid vaccines protect for only a few months at most; other childhood vaccines, with the exception of the flu vaccine, protect for decades or a lifetime.
This difference is especially important for children, who might have to take boosters for decades (or at least until we regain our sanity, if we ever do). Further, natural immunity to the original SARS appears to last for decades - we don't know yet if that is true of SARS-COV-2, but if it is the vaccines are an even worse bet.
3) Side effect profile: the COVID-19 vaccines have moderate to serious short-term side effects for an enormous number of people who receive them, far more than the flu vaccine or other common childhood vaccines.
They also cause medically significant heart inflammation in as many as 1 in 3,000 to 1 in 5,000 teenage boys who receive them. Given that Covid itself is little more than a cold for almost all healthy children and teens, the vaccines have a risk-benefit profile that is unacceptable for teenagers, much less children.
This is why many countries have not recommended them for people under 16. This is the current WHO recommendation for children and adolescents. They have rewritten it under political pressure, but if you read it carefully, you will see that they say children 12-15 "may be offered this vaccine" ONLY if they "are at higher risk of severe COVID-19." Basically, that means the morbidly obese and kids with severe immune deficiencies, cancer, etc.:
Vaccines are usually tested in adults first, and only later assessed in children when safety has been proven in adults, because children are still developing and growing. COVID-19 has also been a more serious and dangerous disease among older people. Now that the vaccines have been determined to be safe for adults, they are being studied in children.
WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) has concluded that the Pfizer/BionTech vaccine is suitable for use by people aged 12 years and above. Children aged between 12 and 15 who are at higher risk of severe COVID-19 [emphasis added] may be offered this vaccine alongside other priority groups for vaccination. Vaccine trials for children are ongoing and WHO will update its recommendations when the evidence or epidemiological situation justifies a change in policy.
Vaccine Mandate Cease & Desist Letter to School Sample Letter
School Board Members
Address
City, State, Zip
RE: School Board Lack of Authority to Mandate New Vaccine Requirements for School Attendance and violations of state, federal, and Constitutional law
Dear Superintendent and Members of the School Board:
As a parent two children in the School District, I am hereby asserting my child’s right to an in-person education as guaranteed by our California Constitution, free of any unlawful and coercive new vaccination requirements. School Board lacks legal authority to add any new vaccine requirement in order for my child to attend in-person school.
Under existing California law, the Board of City is not the proper authority to add a new vaccine to the childhood immunization schedule.
California Health & Safety Code Requirements for Adding New Vaccines
There is a list of ten childhood immunizations required in order for students to gain admittance to public schools in California at certain stages of their education, and this list does not include any COVID-19 vaccines. See Cal. Health & Safety Code § 120335(a)(1)-(10). Under California Health & Safety Code § 120335(a)(11), only the California Department of Public Health (the “Dept” or “CDPH”) can add a new vaccine to this childhood immunization schedule, and at this time, the CDPH has not done so. No matter how eagerly the School Board would like to impose a new vaccine on unwilling students, California law simply does not allow individual public schools or school districts like School Board to unilaterally decide which additional vaccines its students must take prior to being allowed to enjoy an in-person public education, an education guaranteed by our California Constitution, Article IX. Even the CDPH is expressly bound by statutory limitations on its authority to take measures to protect the spread of diseases as it can do so only when necessary and only if the measures actually work. See Cal. Health & Safety Code § 120140.
Moreover, even if the CDPH itself elected to mandate a COVID-19 vaccine under Section 120335(a)(11) for all relevant California public schools, California law also requires that both medical and personal belief exemptions be allowed. See Cal. Health & Safety Code § 120338. Accordingly, any unilateral COVID-19 mandate that School Board purports to impose on its students, and particularly without allowance for medical and personal belief exemptions, is illegal under California law and is also unconstitutional on its face.
Federal Emergency Use Authorization Law Requires a Right to Refuse EUA Products and Experimental Medical Trials involving Children Require Parental Consent
In addition, while neither CDPH nor our state legislature has mandated any COVID-19 vaccine for public or private school attendance, neither authority can do so while the vaccines are still under emergency use authorization without express informed consent. 21 U.S.C. § 360-bbb-3 (the “EUA statute”). This EUA statute explicitly states that anyone to whom an EUA product is administered must be informed of the option to refuse the product, as well as the risks and benefits of receiving it. Although the FDA has purportedly approved one of the mRNA vaccines, in reality, the approved vaccine, the Pfizer Comirnaty vaccine, is not available or in widespread circulation in the United States. Instead, the only COVID-19 vaccines being offered to members of the public in California, including students 12 years of age or older, are still under emergency use authorization, including the Pfizer Biontech COVID-19 vaccine product. There is consequently no full FDA approval of any COVID-19 vaccine that is available for students of any age in California. In addition, all COVID-19 vaccines, including the Pfizer Comirnaty vaccine, remain authorized only under emergency use for ages 12-15, and thus no public entity can mandate such an experimental vaccine for students in that age range. If neither CDPH nor our state legislature can currently mandate these vaccines due to federal EUA law and federal pre-emption issues, clearly the School Board cannot unilaterally mandate an experimental use COVID-19 vaccine for its students either.
EUA products are defined by federal law as experimental which means the administration of them is akin to entering one into a medical trial. It is important to point out that there are legal and regulatory requirements that must be adhered to prior to entering a minor into a medical trial. Pointedly, a child cannot by law be entered into a medical trial unless there is a benefit. Even if there is only a minimal risk to children, the regulations require that the parents expressly assent to the entry of their child into a medical trial. 45 CFR 46.404, 45 CFR 46.408. If there is a greater than minimal risk, which here there is the greatest risk of death, there must be a direct benefit and the risk must be as favorable as alternative approaches. 45 CFR 46.405. With an undisputed 99.97% recovery rate for children and existing alternative treatments available, this legal threshold cannot be met.
Unnecessary Liability for School Board for an Unnecessary Product
Finally, it should be noted that
under the Federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act, all
COVID-19 vaccine makers are provided immunity from liability for their products.
However, School Board and any schools attempting to mandate an experimental use
vaccine or even an FDA approved vaccine that such school lacks authority to
mandate under our Health & Safety code will certainly open themselves up
for lawsuits if a student is injured by an unlawfully mandated COVID-19
vaccine.
It is also unclear why School Board believes that mandating a COVID-19 vaccine will do anything to prevent the spread of COVID-19 on school grounds. COVID-19 vaccines appear to be failing in significant measures around the globe. Highly vaccinated countries such as Israel and the United Kingdom are showing their own cases rising dramatically, with hospitals filling up with patients who are already fully vaccinated. Even the CDC is warning that boosters may soon be needed for U.S. consumers of these products, as more so-called “breakthrough cases” are discovered. It is unclear how School Board can be so blindly insistent of the benefits of a vaccine product at the same time numerous health authorities and media outlets around the globe are revealing these products to be unable to stop either transmission, infection, or even hospitalization or death. There is also the possibility that the vaccine products themselves are causing the variants, as numerous scientists have previously warned, because they are “leaky vaccines” (they do not eradicate the virus, they are only designed to lesson severe symptoms, per their own literature). Due to that nature, since the virus is not eliminated, it is under pressure to mutate. As these COVID-19 vaccine products are still in their clinical trial stages, there is still much unknown about their benefits or potential long-term health risks.
Moreover, the delta variant is now alleged to be the dominant variant in California. The CDC has made it clear in recent weeks that vaccinated persons can transmit the delta variant and might even possess higher viral loads than those who were not vaccinated, particularly those who have already naturally recovered from COVID-19. Since none of the vaccine products were ever tested for or intended to prevent infection or transmission (per the literature in their own clinical trials), choosing to get a COVID-19 vaccine must remain an individual and personal health choice, with individualized risk-benefit assessments.
There is no legitimate public health reason to mandate that healthy children take a product that is still in its experimental clinical trials and that could cause more harm than benefit to this age cohort. School Board has no place attempting to mandate a product that does not even satisfy a rational basis, let alone a compelling governmental interest, for intruding upon significant Constitutional protections and rights to privacy, due process of law, and equal protection under the law.
At this point, those who are vaccinated have presumably protected themselves against severe COVID or death. As numerous studies indicate, and public health authorities acknowledge, children are at little risk of developing severe COVID-19. Accordingly, requiring any COVID-19 vaccine, especially among student populations in middle and high school, for a product that does not even prevent transmission to others, is not the answer. It appears to be an unethical and unscientific way to use children as a shield to protect segments of the adult population who do not actually understand the limitations of these vaccine products, and who have their own option to be vaccinated.
In conclusion, School Board lacks any legal authority to bypass our existing state and federal laws and impose a new experimental vaccine as a condition to attending school. Accordingly, my child will not be taking an experimental COVID-19 vaccine product in order to be allowed to attend in-person education within School Board, as he/she already has a Constitutional right to attend without such unlawful and coercive vaccination conditions attached.
Any attempts to prevent my child from exercising his/her basic Constitutional rights to an in-person public education in California will be met with prompt legal action.
Sincerely,
Larry Elder Vows To Reverse Vaccine, Mask Mandates
Elder said he believes vaccines work and that he’s gotten a shot, but has throughout the campaign emphasized his belief that freedom is important.
California governor candidate Larry Elder is vowing to reverse any COVID-19 vaccine and mask mandates Gov. Gavin Newsom has put in place if he’s chosen to replace the Democrat.
Elder told reporters on Aug. 13 that he saw the possibility of fresh mandates being issued by Newsom and other officials in California.
“If I become governor, when I become governor, assuming there are mandates for masks and statewide mandates for vaccines, they will be suspended right away. This is America. We have freedom in America. Virtually anyone in California who wants to be vaccinated can do so,” Elder said during a press conference, local media reported.
Newsom, in his first term, is facing a recall election.
Voters are slated to head to the polls on Sept. 14. Some have already received mail-in ballots.
Voters can choose to recall Newsom. If they do, they’ll also select who would replace him.
Elder, an EpochTV host, is the leading GOP candidate in the recall race, according to several polls.
Newsom last week ordered teachers and other school employees to either get a COVID-19 vaccine or get tested regularly for COVID-19, several weeks after he issued a similar order for state and health care workers.
Newsom responded last week to Elder’s pledge during a recent press conference.
“Day one, he proudly states, as do all the other Republican candidates, day one, they proudly state, day one, that they would eliminate any mask requirements in our public schools to keep our kids safe and healthy and in-person to get the social, emotional support they deserve. Day one he would repeal that as he would repeal any requirement for vaccine verifications, including [for] health care workers,” he told reporters.
Polls Show Gavin Newsom Losing Recall Election by Over 10%+
Just prior to the start of the first televised debate in the Gavin Newsom recall election Wednesday evening, a shock poll showed the governor losing the first question ("Should Gavin Newsom be recalled?") by double digits.
The poll came from Survey USA and the San Diego Union Tribune, and was conducted among 1,100 Californians from Aug. 2 to Aug. 4. It found that 51% of respondents were in favor of recalling Newsom, while only 40% wanted to keep him in power. The previous Survey USA/San Diego Union-Tribune poll from May found 36% in favor of the recall with 47% opposed.
Unlike a recent UC Berkeley/Los Angeles Time poll that was weighted by whether the respondent was likely to vote in the Sept. 14 recall election, the Survey USA carried no such weight, which is even more alarming for the governor. The Berkeley/Los Angeles Time poll found double-digit opposition to the recall, but a dead heat when weighted by likelihood to vote. Polls have consistently shown a large enthusiasm gap, strongly suggesting Republicans are more likely to turn out.
The new poll's other shocking finding is a new leader on question two ("Which candidate should replace Newsom if he loses question one"): YouTuber Kevin Paffrath, the most high-profile Democrat on the bottom of the ballot.
Paffrath received 27% support, with conservative radio host Larry Elder, who led three separate polls released in recent weeks, at 23% support. The only other candidate with double-digit support was businessman John Cox (10%).
Former San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer came in fourth with 5% support, while reality TV star Caitlyn Jenner and former Rep. Doug Ose tied for fifth, with 4% support.
Lets Never Forget - OrangeCounty Beach Cities File Restraining Orders on Gavin Newsom's Beach Closure Orders
OC Board of Education to Sue Gavin Newsom Over Face Masks
Board members say that Gov. Newsom has misused his power “in a way that threatens serious harm to Orange County’s children.”
Claiming that wearing masks harms young children, the Orange County Board of Education announced Tuesday that it plans to sue Gov. Gavin Newsom over what it calls an “unwarranted” state mandate that students wear masks in classrooms this school year.
The board voted 4-0 during closed session in favor of filing the suit, and then had an attorney read a press release in which they said Newsom has abused his authority by indefinitely continuing to issue health edicts under a state of emergency.
Last month, state officials ordered all students, teachers, staff and visitors on school campuses to wear face masks while indoors in the coming school year.
“He has now misused that power in a way that threatens serious harm to Orange County’s children,” board members wrote.
Board members Mari Barke, Tim Shaw, Lisa Sparks and Ken Williams voted in favor of filing the lawsuit during a special meeting Tuesday that featured only one item on the agenda: litigation. Board member Beckie Gomez, who attended the beginning of the meeting, left at 4:30 p.m and was not present for the vote.
Board members, who are elected, have been vocal about their views against face masks in schools. But while the state said its masks-in-class mandate will be enforced by school districts, the Board of Education does not oversee any of the county’s 27 districts.
In addition to saying Newsom and officials in the state’s executive agencies are overstepping their authority with the mask mandate, the board also questioned the validity of face masks.
“Putting aside for the moment the lack of a sound medical or scientific basis for the Governor’s requirement to mask school children (who in general are neither at risk from COVID-19 nor likely to spread it), and also putting aside the lack of any thoughtful, well-considered and transparent balancing of the substantial harms of forced masking of juveniles against the purported benefits, the Governor and his state-level executive agencies do not have the power to continue the state of emergency indefinitely, and to continue to suspend the Administrative Procedure Act to circumvent normal agency rulemaking requirements.”
On Tuesday, Board members did not present evidence that face masks harm children. In the past, they have said that the continuous use of face masks hurts students’ education as well as their emotional well-being. Children learning English and those with special needs especially need to see a teacher’s face, they said.
The state’s in-class mask order has added a layer of controversy during the pandemic, with some parents supporting the move and others saying it will harm their children. In Orange County, at least three school boards – representing Capistrano, Placentia-Yorba Linda, and Saddleback Unified school districts – voted for resolutions this summer that asked the state to ease the mandate and make face masks optional.
The Orange County Board of Education will be represented for free by Tyler & Bursch, a law firm with offices in Anaheim and Murrieta.
This would mark the second pandemic-related lawsuit the board files against state officials.
Last August, the board filed a lawsuit against Newsom and the state’s public health officer, Sonia Y. Angell, seeking in-person learning at a time when school campuses across California closed down due to the pandemic. That lawsuit went straight to the California Supreme Court, where Justices asked Gov. Newsom to respond to the Board’s petition and a second related lawsuit. On Sept. 9, the Court refused to hear the case, which alleged that actions by Newsom and Angell were unconstitutional and violated the right to equal access to education.
That lawsuit also was represented pro-bono by Tyler & Bursch.
On July 22, two parent groups – Let Them Breathe and Reopen California Schools – filed a lawsuit against Newsom and state public health officials, seeking to end the school face mask mandate.
Here is the article for the OC register.
Who Wants to Arrest and Jail All Unvaccinated Adults?
This is how nuts people have become in California.
In a shocking experiment, random beachgoers in San Diego, California are asked if they’ll sign a petition supporting the arrest and detention of all unvaccinated adults until they agree to take the COVID-19 vaccine.
Worldwide Pro Choice Protests Against Vaccine Mandates & Passes
150,000+ people across France protested against a bill requiring everyone to have a special virus pass to enter restaurants and mandating COVID-19 vaccinations for all health care workers. Police fired water cannons and tear gas on rowdy protesters in Paris.
Thousands of people demonstrated in Athens, Greece and other Greek cities over plans to make COVID-19 vaccinations mandatory for all health workers.
Hundreds of people marched in Cape Town, South Africa to protest against the COVID-19 vaccines. They say they want their constitutional right to freedom of association respected. They have decried, what they say is information censorship against voices that do not accept the dominant narrative on COVID-19 and vaccines.
"We say 'No to the Green Pass' because it creates A series citizens and B series citizens. Citizens who have rights and citizens who have no rights. This is against the Italian Constitution. It is a liberticidal and undemocratic measure," one protester argued in Italy.
Biden’s motorcade is met with jeers and middle fingers at his visit to Allentown, PA
Thousands of protesters took to streets in Sydney, Australia demanding an end to lockdown enforcement. Protesters violated Covid restrictions, chanting slogans of ‘freedom’ in an area that was declared a Covid hotspot. While anti-vaccination sentiments were at the forefront in Brisbane, Melbourne protests echoed with anti-lockdown slogans.Protest against Trinity Health vaccine mandate in Grand Rapids, Michigan
Hundreds of hospital workers showed up at the state Capitol on Wednesday to protest two of the largest health care providers in Arizona mandating getting vaccinated.California’s Capitol was buzzing Monday with people protesting a bill that would make it harder to get a medical exemption for vaccinating their children. Every year, tens of thousands of Americans get sick from diseases that could be prevented by vaccines – some people are hospitalized, some even die. Immunization is our best protection against these diseases.
Gavin Newsom Compares Unvaccinated People to Murderous Drunk Drivers
California Gov. Gavin Newsom compares unvaccinated Americans to drunk drivers. pic.twitter.com/hEaHIN1E5T
— The First (@TheFirstonTV) July 26, 2021
Is It Ethical & Legal to Mandate a Vaccine?
Am I vaccinated? Do I need to tell everyone who asks about my vaccine status? NO!
There is no legal requirement that individuals must disclose their vaccination status publicly, Piatt says, or to all interested persons. "An individual can set [their] own boundaries with respect to what information they are comfortable sharing with others."
That said, says Piatt, vaccination information may be required in certain situations.
For example, schools require information about childhood vaccinations for public safety purposes. In addition, employers generally may be able to ask about vaccine status for safety and planning purposes, barring contrary state or local laws.
California looks like they are slipping down a slope of unethical mandates.
Locked-Down States Are Where COVID Is Growing Most
The response from the corporate media and the Left was predictable. California Governor Gavin Newsom declared the move “absolutely reckless.” Beto O’Rourke called the GOP a “cult of death.” Joe Biden called the move “Neanderthal thinking.” Keith Olbermann insisted, “Texas has decided to join the side of the virus” and suggested Texans shouldn’t be allowed to take the covid vaccine. Vanity Fair ran an article with the title “Republican Governors Celebrate COVID Anniversary with Bold Plan to Kill Another 500,000 Americans.”
Other states have followed in Texas’s wake, and Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, and Georgia are now all states where covid restrictions range from weak to nonexistent.
Georgia and Florida, of course, are both notable for ending lockdowns and restriction much earlier than many other states. And in those cases as well, the state governments were criticized for their policies, which were said to be reckless and sure to lead to unprecedented death. Georgia’s policy was denounced as an experiment in “human sacrifice.”
Yet in recent weeks, these predictions about Texas’s fate have proven to be spectacularly wrong. Moreover, many of the states with the worst growth in covid cases—and the worst track records in overall death counts—have been states that have had some of the harshest lockdowns. The failure of the lockdown narrative in this case has been so overwhelming that last week, when asked about the Texas situation, Anthony Fauci could only suggest a few unconvincing lines about how maybe Texans are voluntarily wearing masks and locking down more strenuously than people in other states. In Fauci's weak-sauce explanation we see a narrative that simply fails to explain the actual facts of the matter.
The Texas situation is just one piece of a state-by-state picture that is devastating for the lockdowns-save-lives narrative.
For example, let’s look at covid case numbers as of April 20.
Case numbers are a favorite metric for advocates of stay-at-home orders, business closures, mask mandates, and repressive measures in the name of disease control.
In Texas, the total new cases (seven-day moving average) on April 20 was 3,004. That comes out to approximately 103 per million.
Now, let’s look at Michigan, where a variety of strict mask mandates and partial lockdowns continue. Restaurant capacity remains at 50 percent, and the state continues to issue edicts about how many people one is allowed to have over for dinner.
In Michigan, the seven-day moving average for new infections as of April 20 was 790 per million - nearly eight times worse than Texas.
Last week, Anthony Fauci, head of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) struggled to come up with an explanation as he testified to Congress.
In previous weeks, Fauci tended to rely on the old tried-and-true claim that if we only wait two to four more weeks, cases will explode wherever covid restrictions are lessened or eliminated. Lockdown advocates tried this for months after Georgia ended its stay-at-home order, although Georgia consistently performed better than many states that continued their lockdowns.
But now that we’re six weeks out from the end of Texas’s mask mandate and partial lockdowns, Fauci could offer no plausible explanation. Rather, when pressed on the matter by Representative Jim Jordan, Fauci insisted that what really matters is compliance rather than the existence of mask mandates and lockdown mandates:
There’s a difference between lockdown and the people obeying the lockdown…. You know you could have a situation where they say, "We’re going to lock down," and yet you have people doing exactly what they want—
Jordan asked if this explains the situation in Michigan and New Jersey (and other states with quickly growing covid case rates). Fauci then claimed he couldn’t hear the question, and Jordan was cut off by the committee chairman.
No one who is familiar with the situation in states like Texas, Florida, and Georgia, however, would find it plausible that the spread of covid has been lessened in those areas by more militant use of masks and social distancing. Fauci's testimony was clearly just a case of a government “expert” grasping about for an explanation.
But don’t expect Fauci and his supporters to give up on insisting that New York and Michigan are doing "the right thing" while Texas and Florida are embracing "human sacrifice" as a part of a "death cult."
The actual numbers paint a very different picture, and even casual observers can now see that the old narrative was very, very wrong.
Court Declares Gov. Newsom’s Abuse of Power Unconstitutional
As the California Globe has reported for several months, California Assemblymen Kevin Kiley and James Gallagher sued to stop the "one-man rule" of California Governor Gavin Newsom. On October 21st, they were in Sutter County Superior Court, alleging that Gov. Gavin Newsom abused his emergency powers in issuing Executive Orders that had nothing to do with the pandemic coronavirus crisis.
On Monday, in their abuse of power case against Governor Newsom, State Supreme Court Judge Sarah Heckman tentatively ruled in favor of Gallagher (R-Yuba City) and Kiley (R-Rocklin).
Judge Heckman ruled unconstitutional the Governor's latest Executive Order N-67-20 in the preliminary decision. More significantly, the preliminary decision of Judge Heckman puts a permanent injunction on the Governor that prohibits him from making or modifying state law unilaterally.
Assemblyman Kiley wrote:
The Judge ruled Newsom violated the Constitution. She also issued an injunction restraining the Governor from issuing any more unconstitutional orders. You can read the ruling here.
This marks an end to Gavin Newsom’s one-man rule. It makes clear that the laws of the State of California do not countenance an autocracy under any circumstances – not for a single day, and certainly not for eight months with no end in sight.
The ruling is “tentative,” meaning Newsom has a few days to try to persuade the Judge to change her mind, but it’s rare for a tentative ruling to change. While Newsom can appeal, we are confident the decision is on solid legal ground and will stand.
Kiley and Gallagher claim that the Constitution of California has an explicit clause of separation-of-powers that Gov. Newsom has violated. "The Governor of California is legally barred from doing the very thing that Gov. Newsom did here: exercising legislative authority," they said.
The Executive Order of Gov. Newsom to create an all-vote-by-mail-poll suspends and significantly alters the Election Code of California. Gov. Newsom claims that the order "fits well within the limited grant of authority by the Governor under the Emergency Services Act."
"The lawyers of Gov. Newsom claimed that the governor has the" plenary "authority during a declared State of Emergency and under the California Emergency Services Act (CESA), along with" strong police powers.
In her ruling, Judge Heckman explains:
The Governor takes the position the California Emergency Services Act’s grant of authority to exercise “all police power vested in the state,” allowing him to “promulgate, issue, and enforce such orders and regulations as he deems necessary” authorizes him to legislate by unilaterally amending existing statutory law. Not only is this an active and ongoing controversy between the parties, but it is a critically important one for the Judicial Branch to resolve.
The Governor has issued three executive orders during the current state of emergency specifically regarding the November 3,2020 general election (Def. Exs. 4 and 5; Pl. Ex. D) and has issued more than 50 different executive orders changing numerous Califomia statutes since the state of emergency was declared. (Pl. Ex. F) Further, despite representations by the Governor’s legal counsel that Executive Order N-67- 20 dated June 3,2020 is “withdrawn,” there is no evidence it has been formally rescinded, and the Executive Order includes provisions controlling the election process for the November 3, 2020 General Election which were not superseded by the subsequently enacted legislation.
Specifically, despite the subsequent legislation, the Executive Order remained in effect requiring all county election officials to use the Secretary of State’s barcode tracking system for all mail ballots and altered the statutorily required outreach in Voter’s Choice Act counties to provide noticed, public meetings allowing for public comment on voting access for California voters with disabilities or limited English proficiency.
Judge Heckman also found “The plain meaning of the CESA does not delegate to the Governor the power to legislate, and therefore does not violate the separation of powers under California Constitution.”
Importantly, Judge Heckman did rule “On the issue of whether Executive Order N.67-20 was authorized by the California Emergency Services Act, the court finds the executive order was NOT authorized by the CESA because it improperly amended existing statutory law, exceeding the governor’s authority and violating the separation of powers.”
The judge explains:
The CESA allows the Governor, during a state of emergency, to issue orders and regulations and to suspend certain statutes, but the plain and unambiguous language of CESA does not permit the Governor to amend statutes or make new statutes. The Governor does not have the power or authority to assume the Legislature’s role of creating legislative policy and enactments. Because Executive Order N-67-20 amended sections of the Elections Code it exceeds the Governor’s authority under CESA and renders Executive Order N-67-2O invalid.
Kiley and Gallagher claimed that, unless allowed by the Constitution, the governor could not exercise legislative authority, while the governor's lawyers argued, "Making orders is what it says," and that the legislature was responsible for overriding the orders of the governor.
In court, Gallagher and Kiley argued that there is a very clear difference in the emergency powers of the California Governor when it relates to legislation: he does not enact regulations or new laws, but the emergency powers allow the Governor to override legislation that is a roadblock to decision-making during the emergency. If it is getting in the way of promoting emergency operations, he may suspend any regulatory law.
It appears Judge Heckman agreed with them:
The Court finds good cause to issue a permanent injunction consistent with the request set forth in paragraph 2l of plaintiffs’ complaint (Def. Ex. l), as follows: 8 Gavin Newsom, in his official capacity as Governor of the State of California is enjoined and prohibited from exercising any power under the California Emergency Services Act (Government Code $ 8550 et seq.) which amends, alters, or changes existing statutory law or makes new statutory law or legislative policy.
“Nobody disputes that there are actions that should be taken to keep people safe during an emergency. But that doesn’t mean that we put our Constitution and free society on hold by centralizing all power in the hands of one man,” Gallagher and Kiley said in a press statement.
The Court’s decision does not impact any of the election protocols for the 2020 election.
California Globe was the only Capitol media present at the trial.
Gavin Newsom's Children Are Back to Private School Classrooms
At a news conference, Newsom said that his four children, aged 4 to 11, had returned in some capacity to classrooms.
Governor Gavin Newsom said Friday his children returned under a "phased-in approach" to in-person learning while many schools across the state remain closed due to Covid-19, including virtually all public schools where the governor lives in Sacramento County.
According to a source, Newsom's children attend a private school in Sacramento County that has a hybrid curriculum that alternates remote and in-person education before returning full-time next month. POLITICO, for privacy purposes, does not name the school.
"They are gradually returning to school and we are gradually leaving the very difficult distance learning that we've been doing, so many parents are doing up and down the state," Newsom said Friday when asked about the education of his own children.
Under Newsom's reopening scheme, Sacramento County schools are authorized to open classrooms. But major public school districts in the city, including San Juan Unified, which serves the neighborhood of Newsom, have yet to do so. Next month, several Sacramento County districts expect to reopen elementary schools, while San Juan has a target date for January. A reopening date has yet to be proposed by Sacramento City United.
Reopening debate: This week, members of the California assembly sought more concrete action on school reopening from Newsom and state officials, stressing testing ability. For teachers across the state who believe it's not yet safe to reopen classes, the opportunity to consistently test students and staff has been a sticking point.
According to an EdSource report released Friday, in 21 of the state's 58 counties, all school districts are either providing some form of in-person instruction or preparing to do so soon.
Newsom referred to $5.3 billion in state and federal school funding to respond to Covid-19 and two months' worth of PPE offered by the state to districts.
He expressed his conviction that schools need to be opened as soon as possible, citing academic and social-emotional issues, but stressed that local districts remain responsible for the decisions. The California Teachers Association has been adamant that it is not safe to return to schools yet.
"We absolutely believe that the social-emotional learning that takes place in the classroom is the best place for our children, certainly also the best place for their parents. And so it is absolutely incumbent on doing everything in our power to support our districts so that they can reopen safely, with emphasis on reopening safely," said Newsom.
Newsom spoke at the unveiling of a $25 million laboratory on Friday that will dramatically increase the Covid-19 testing capacity of the state, which he said could help districts reopen schools. The laboratory, designed in collaboration with PerkinElmer, a diagnostics firm, will begin processing tests next month with a goal of 150,000 tests by March.
Political implications: The return to school of the Newsom children confirms lawmakers' fears that families who can afford private schools have a jumpstart, further increasing the disparity in achievement. This summer, the CTA criticized the governor for allowing private schools to reopen exemptions, which almost all private schools have done.
The admission that his own kids are back in classrooms could raise Newsom's pressure to do more to reopen schools. When the day goes by with low-income public school children dealing with distance learning, expect the personal case of Newsom to become a high-profile example of coronavirus educational inequities.
What's next: The pressure is on the state to issue more prescriptive guidance for schools to reopen, as security issues are kept up by school reopening talks with teacher unions and the state's local control strategy has produced uneven plans for the six million K-12 students in California.
State-by-State Map of School-Building Closures
400,000 California Ballots Sent To People Who Moved Out Or Died
Millions of California ballots have been delivered to residents across the state as early voting begins for the 2020 general election, but some have gone to people who should no longer be registered to vote in the state, one group claims.
A new study from the Election Integrity Project California has found that close to 400,000 ballots have been sent to people who moved or died.
Here is one real example:
I moved from one city to another in California. Put in a change of address, the State never changed. Put in another request, but they had a technical error. Now I have to hunt down my ballot, which the State can’t find. California would be red, but the elections are run by Democrats who will do anything to win. A friend who’s registered Democrat has no problems changing address, but registered Republicans have errors.
This is the most illegitimate election of all time...
Here are the state-by-state vote-by-mail 2020 election rules.
Rush Limbaugh's Amazing Interview With President Trump
Interview: Rush Limbaugh Interviews Donald Trump on The Rush Limbaugh Show - October 9, 2020 from Factba.se on Vimeo.
Rush Limbaugh's interview with Trump on October 9, 2020
Skip to 7 minutes into this video to hear Trump's description of the cocktail to cure him.
The president repeatedly referred to an antibody cocktail he received from the company Regeneron as a "cure" for the novel coronavirus. No cure yet exists for the virus, and the Regeneron product is not widely available to the public. Trump is looking to approve the drug for emergency use of the drug claiming it wiped out the virus.
Trump discusses the "fake news" media and his hatred for the lack of support for his accomplishments.
Trump also says that people in California vote 3 times and he thinks he will do very well in the election regardless. Fake ballots and voter fraud!
State-by-State Map of COVID School Buildings Closures
- No order (Yellow) - In-person instruction decisions are currently being made on a local level, with states only providing guidelines or recommendations.
- Full closure (Dark Red) - In-person instruction is not allowed.
- Ordered open (Blue) - In-person instruction must be available to all students, either full- or part-time.
- Partial closure (Light Red) – Full-time in-person instruction is either not allowed in certain regions of the state or is only available for certain age groups. Hybrid instruction may be allowed.
State Public School Enrollment Information on state orders or recommendations
Alabama 739,716 Districts will make the decision on whether to open school buildings. The state board of education encourages that all schools provide, at a minimum, access to both traditional and remote learning throughout the 2020-21 school year.
Alaska 130,963 Each school district will decide when and if to reopen buildings. The state departments of education and health created a framework and guidance to help districts as they decide how to provide instruction.
Arizona 1,141,511 School districts, in conjunction with their local health departments, must consider benchmarks on new cases, diagnostic test percent positivity, and COVID-19 related hospitalizations to determine when in-person classes can begin again. Starting Aug. 17, districts are required to provide “free on-site learning opportunities” and support services for students who need access to a computer or a supervised place to be during the day, even if the school system has opted for full-time distance learning.
Arkansas 495,291 Education Secretary Johnny Key issued guidance Aug. 5 that requires districts to offer in-person instruction five days a week when classes resume. Districts were required to open their schools as soon as Aug. 24 and as late as Aug. 26. Decisions on whether to close a school is being made in collaboration with the Arkansas departments of health and education.
California 6,272,734 Each local district will decide when to reopen, but in order to offer any face-to-face instruction, they must abide by metrics that Gov. Gavin Newsom unveiled on Aug. 28. According to the state’s new four-tiered framework, districts may allow students into school buildings only if their counties meet key local metrics on coronavirus spread for two weeks.
Colorado 911,536 Reopening plans are made locally. The reopening guidance for schools put out by the state recommends that districts have a variety of plans in place in addition to in-person classes, including teaching students in small groups and through distance learning.
Connecticut 526,634 Districts were asked to plan for all students to return to school for full-time, in-person instruction this fall as long as public health conditions support face-to-face teaching.
Delaware 138,405 On Sept. 3, Gov. John Carney formally extended Delaware’s state of emergency for another 30 days, restricting in-person gatherings. Schools have started to reopen with a mix of in-person and remote instruction, based on “minimal to moderate” viral spread among communities. The state provides free COVID-19 testing for school staff and students, but health officials said the state could not require staff to be tested before returning to school. The state also released guidance for low-, medium-, and high-risk youth sports programs, requiring both facial masks and physical distancing.
District of Columbia 93,741 The District of Columbia Public Schools will continue with distance learning for at least the first term of the 2020-21 school year, from Aug. 31 through Nov. 6, Mayor Muriel Bowser announced.
Florida 2,846,444 A state court judge on Aug. 24 issued a temporary injunction blocking a state emergency order requiring all brick-and-mortar schools to open at least five days a week by Aug. 31. However, a Florida state appeals court on Aug. 28 issued a stay of the trial court judge’s injunction, putting the state’s emergency order back in place. The appellate court is considering an expedited appeal on the merits of the dispute.
Georgia 1,767,202 Districts will decide whether to open school buildings, open them on a limited basis as part of a staggered schedule, or use an all-remote schedule. Those decisions should be informed by whether students and/or staff have been directly exposed to or diagnosed with COVID-19.
Hawaii 181,278 As a statewide district, Hawaii schools reopened on Aug. 17. In some areas, schools may offer a blend of in-person and remote learning, but in others, due to rising coronavirus rates, they are allowed to teach only remotely.
Idaho 310,522 Schools were expected to welcome students for in-person instruction this fall while adhering to public health guidelines and maintaining options for blended learning for students who don't return and in case of a return to full-time remote learning. On Oct. 4, a White House Coronavirus Task Force report said that school openings may be the cause of rising coronavirus cases in a number of Idaho counties and recommended that schools in these counties move to a remote-only learning model. The Center for Public Integrity reported that this "appears to be the first time the task force has explicitly recommended closing schools".
Illinois 1,982,327 Districts can decide whether to open school buildings, following health and safety guidance from the state. However, the Illinois State Board of Education has "strongly encouraged" a return to full, in-person instruction in the fall, as long as the regions are in Phase 4 of reopening.
Indiana 1,055,706 Districts set their own academic calendars and can make individual decisions about when or if students return to in-person classes. State health officials have created a color-coded map that indicates the level of community spread in each county, which Health Commissioner Kristina Box has said schools should use as guidance when making decisions about in-person instruction.
Iowa 514,833 On July 17, Gov. Reynolds, overriding local decisions, ordered every student to spend at least half of their schooling inside classrooms. Districts must also provide online classes for parents who demand it. Temporary/continuous remote learning for an entire school or district can only be requested if the COVID-19 positivity rate averages 15 percent to 20 percent countywide over the past 14 days, and 10 percent absenteeism is expected for in-person instruction.
Kansas 497,733 The Kansas Board of Education voted July 22 to reject an order by Gov. Laura Kelly that would have delayed the start of school until Sept. 8. The vote put the decision on when to reopen back in the hands of local school districts.
Kentucky 677,821 Gov. Andy Beshear has recommended that schools should not begin in-person classes before Sept. 28. State officials have created a color-coded framework that they recommend schools use to make decisions about in-person instruction based on community spread.
Louisiana 711,783 While school districts can choose when to reopen, the state's board of education has dictated a series of standards districts must meet before they reopen.
Maine 180,461 The state has approved all schools to offer in-person instruction this fall with required health and safety measures, but individual districts will make their own decisions.
Maryland 896,827 The state allows districts to make plans for in-person classes, as long as they follow state and federal health recommendations.
Massachusetts 962,297 Each school district and all but two charter schools have submitted their return-to-school plans to the state education department; approximately 70 percent of school systems are opting for either in-person or hybrid learning.
Michigan 1,504,194 Gov. Gretchen Whitmer said in-person learning can only occur in a region that's in at least phase four of her reopening plan. The state legislature passed a measure that says districts must reconfirm their plans on how to deliver instruction every 30 days. Districts that reopen for in-person instruction must prioritize K-5 students.
Minnesota 889,304 Districts can determine whether to start the school year remotely, fully in-person, or in a hybrid model based on the number of new coronavirus cases in their county. The state developed suggested thresholds for when school buildings can reopen, and districts can adjust their learning models throughout the school year if needed.
Mississippi 471,298 Districts may choose to open school buildings, but they must modify schedules, restrict gatherings, and observe social distancing in accordance with state and federal recommendations.
Missouri 913,441 Districts were required to open by Aug. 24 but could receive a waiver from the state's department of education to open later.
Montana 148,844 The state department of education issued July guidance on four possible reopening scenarios, including for "near full capacity of attendance and operations in a traditional setting, with remote learning for students not onsite." Under this scenario, there is no limit on group sizes in schools, but social distancing should be observed, and monitoring for symptoms of COVID-19 should still take place, the guidance says.
Nebraska 326,392 Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts has given districts discretion to set their own reopening plans using guidance from the state’s education department. That guidance advises remote or hybrid learning plans in communities with the significant or moderate spread.
Nevada 498,614 Guidance from the Nevada education department says school districts and charters must develop distance learning plans "even if a district/school has sufficient space to open for full-time in-person instruction" under the second phase of the state's reopening guidelines. However, schools must also develop plans that cover in-person learning, under a directive from Gov. Steve Sisolak.
New Hampshire 178,515 Local districts will decide whether they open for full-time, in-person teaching, continue with remote instruction, or employ a combination of the two as part of hybrid models.
New Jersey 1,400,069 Districts develop their own reopening plans that must meet core health and safety standards in the state’s school-reopening guidance. While state guidance released June 26 prioritized a return to in-person classes, on Aug. 12, Gov. Phil Murphy announced an executive order that schools could open as remote-only if they cannot meet health and safety standards for live instruction. However, districts must lay out how they intend to address the health and safety challenges to move to in-person instruction.
New Mexico 333,537 School buildings serving grades K-5 and K-6 can open under a hybrid schedule so long as they are in counties that have demonstrated low enough rates of COVID-19 spread and the New Mexico Public Education Department has approved the school's reopening plans.
New York 2,700,833 School districts across the state can reopen in-person in the fall, though that may be revised on a regional basis if COVID-19 infection rates increase. School systems will have to follow state guidelines, but the specifics of the plans--including whether teaching will be delivered in-person or via a hybrid model-- will be up to the districts.
North Carolina 1,552,497 Starting Oct. 5, districts will be able to open their elementary schools to full-time instruction if they choose Gov. Roy Cooper announced Sept. 17. The districts that do so must still require mask-wearing, symptom screening, and social distancing, but elementary schools will not be required to reduce the number of children in classrooms. For now, middle and high schools must still operate on either a hybrid or fully-remote schedule, and districts must still offer a fully-remote option for elementary families who want it.
North Dakota 113,845 Gov. Doug Burgum said July 14 that school districts could reopen for in-person instruction in consultation with local health officials.
Ohio 1,695,762 Districts will decide whether to open school buildings, but the state department of education has said that they should only do so if they can follow the state's health and safety guidance. All students attending school in person will be required to wear masks, with some medical exemptions.
Oklahoma 698,891 The state has advised districts in its reopening guidance to prepare alternate school calendars for potential school closures. Individual school districts will determine when to start school this fall.
Oregon 609,507 The state department of education outlines state and county COVID-19 metrics that determine whether districts can open buildings part-time, full-time, or not at all. Schools in areas that have seen three weeks of positivity rates and COVID-19 caseloads below public health benchmarks can begin reopening for in-person instruction. Schools in areas that don't meet those benchmarks are barred from reopening buildings unless they receive allowances from the state. As of Sept. 10, 17 of the state's 36 districts are permitted to at least partially reopen school buildings.
Pennsylvania 1,730,757 State guidance allows school districts to decide whether they will use in-person or remote instruction or a mix of both.
Puerto Rico 307,282 On Sept. 14, a new executive order from Gov. Wanda Vázquez Garced required public school educators to continue with distance learning until further notice, according to an advisory from Secretary of Education Eligio Hernández Pérez.
Rhode Island 143,436 Most schools have resumed classes. Districts that began the school year with hybrid or remote learning plans have until Oct. 13 to resume full in-person instruction.
South Carolina 780,882 State Superintendent Molly Spearman sent a letter to the district leaders Sept. 16 urging them to prioritize a return to traditional face-to-face education "for students who need it the most," including elementary students, students with disabilities, English-language learners, and children with poor Internet service. Reported high rates of COVID-19 spread in some counties should not be used to make all operational decisions, Spearman said. At the time of her letter, most school districts in the state were engaged in hybrid or fully-remote learning.
South Dakota 138,975 South Dakota's state education department issued guidance that gives discretion to local districts to set restart plans in consultation with local health officials. It recommends flexible plans that prioritize face-to-face instruction.
Tennessee 1,007,624 Districts will decide whether to open school buildings. The state department of education's guidance also provides a framework that districts can use to assess risk and decide when it would be safe to reopen.
Texas 5,433,471 Texas requires school districts to provide daily, on-campus learning for any family who wants it in order to not lose state funding due to declines in enrollment.
Utah 677,031 The Utah state board of education released a set of minimum requirements for local school districts to meet before reopening schools for in-person instruction. Districts created plans for resuming in-person learning that addresses schedules, hygiene, and safety, monitoring schools, "containing potential outbreaks" and (if necessary) temporarily closing schools again, among other areas.
Vermont 87,359 Schools reopened across the state on Sept. 8, with districts offering in-person, hybrid, and all-remote options for students. The state’s education agency and the health department had recommended full-time in-person learning “as soon as practical,” especially for students in Pre-K through Grade 5. However, local districts currently make the decision on how to reopen.
Virginia 1,289,367 Schools across the state are open in various forms, depending on public health conditions. As of Sept. 22, 68 of the state’s 132 school districts are operating in fully remote learning mode.
Washington 1,123,736 State officials announced Aug. 6 that they recommend schools in areas with high rates of new COVID-19 cases reopen with full-time distance learning for nearly all students. Schools in areas with moderate rates of virus transmission should consider opening buildings only for elementary students, officials said, and districts in areas with low transmission should begin hybrid instruction for middle and high school students. The state's education department earlier this summer urged all schools to reopen for some in-person learning, but the persistence of new COVID-19 cases forced a more cautious set of recommendations for local decisions, Gov. Jay Inslee said.
West Virginia 267,976 Each Saturday, the West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources evaluates COVID-19 transmission rates to determine the instructional options allowed in each county. Currently, some regions of the state are not allowed to open for in-person instruction.
Wisconsin 859,333 Districts decided whether to offer full in-person instruction, stick to remote learning, or go with a hybrid model. The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction has provided guidance as districts develop their plans based on infection rates in their area.
Wyoming 94,313 The state's department of education asked each district to send a detailed plan on how they will reopen their schools.
Public School Enrollment Drops Around the Country
Orange County, Fla., has 8,000 missing students. The Miami-Dade County public schools have 16,000 fewer than last year. Los Angeles Unified — the nation's second-largest school system — is down nearly 11,000. Charlotte-Mecklenburg in North Carolina has 5,000 missing. Utah, Virginia and Washington are reporting declines statewide.
Comprehensive national information is not yet available, but research by NPR and our affiliate stations, along with country-wide media coverage, indicates decreases in enrollment in hundreds of school districts across 20 states. The decline is a departure from recent patterns in each of these districts: big and small, rich and poor, urban and rural. Data from the U.S. over the past 15 years. The Department of Education reveals that the rule has been small and consistent annual rises in public school enrollment.
These fall enrollment declines come six months after schools across the nation shut their doors in the midst of coronavirus lockdowns, as schools have been scrambling to expand remote learning offers and implement safety measures to allow buildings to open for in-person classes, often only a few days a week. The start of the year has been marked in many parts of the world by numerous changes in plans, widespread uncertainty between teachers and families, deep security issues, and concerns about unequal access to technology.
The enrollment declines are particularly evident in kindergarten and pre-K in many countries. We reached out to more than 100 districts for our coverage and heard back from more than 60. The average decrease in kindergarten enrollment in our sample was 16 percent.
And school districts stand to lose money as well.
Public schools are generally funded by states on a per-pupil basis. The first week of October marks the first of two "count days" in many states — a day in the fall, right at the start of the new fiscal year, where school districts must submit an official enrollment count to determine their funding for the subsequent year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Popular Posts (All Time)
-
Table of Contents Introduction: Stress, Smoking, and Health The Normotim Effect: A New Hope in Stress Management Lithium Ascorbate:...
-
The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has been linked to mental health issues related to disease-induced morbidity and mortality and p... -
A group of virologists in February 2020 published a letter in The Lancet stating they “overwhelmingly conclude that this coronavirus origina...
-
Former Hunter Biden business partner Tony Bobulinski has confirmed that an email published in the New York Post's bombshell exposé is i... -
SAMPLE LETTER BELOW 🚨🚨🚨 The secret is NOT to refuse the Jabb.... From a lawyer: If you are being forced to Vax in order to keep your job,...
-
The time is now. As most readers of this substack are now well aware, this is not just about COVID. The Constitution hangs in the balance. P... -
Comment to ACIP meeting of August 30, 2021 submitted by Steve Kirsch - Executive Director of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund stk@treatearl... -
Klaus Schwab's World Economic Forum Government & WHO Lies Tucker & Malone Discuss The World Economic Forum & It's Young ...
-
2 Sources for this story below . . . Justin Bieber reveals he has Ramsay Hunt syndrome Twitter suspended the VaccineTruth2 account Want to ... -
Crimes Against Humanity - The PCR Test Fraud and COVID-19 will be the Case of the Century Reiner Fuellmich - Update on Court Case & P...
