Mistrial for Arizona Rancher Who Shot Illegal Migrant

You never know when your next dinner is coming in the deep sea. To ensure it never misses a meal‚ the black swallower fish has evolved a formidable jaw and a balloon-like belly that allows it to swallow prey much larger than itself. The black swallower (Chiasmodon niger) measures just 25 centimeters (about 10 inches) long‚ but it has been known to swallow fish that are more than double its length and 10 times its weight. They live in many parts of the world’s oceans‚ including tropical and temperate waters across the Atlantic‚ Pacific‚ and Indian Oceans. You’ll have to dive very deep to find one alive‚ though. The species typically dwells around 700 to 3‚000 meters (3‚000 to 10‚000 feet) below the ocean’s surface at a depth where sunlight struggles to reach. Black swallowers are brilliantly adapted to life in the desolate abyss. Like a stealth bomber jet‚ its body is dark and scaleless to avoid detection by predators and prey alike. If the lone-ranging fish is lucky enough to find any prey in its unforgiving environment‚ it will swiftly gobble it up with its gaping mouth. To stop the swallowed victim from evading its guts‚ the mouth and palate are lined with sharp and interlocking teeth that point inwards towards the gullet‚ acting like a spiked trap. Its obnoxious method of eating isn’t perfect‚ however. Very occasionally‚ black swallowers can be found floating on the water’s surface with their stomachs nearly bursting with gas. This occurs when swallowed prey is so large it starts to decompose before the gluttonous host can digest it. Black swallowers were first reported in the early 19th century and appear in a fair number of written accounts about ocean exploration from decades gone by. One of the most colorful historical descriptions comes from a 1904 book called Creatures of the Sea: Being the Life Stories of Some Sea Birds‚ Beasts‚ and Fishes by Frank Thomas Bullen‚ a fascinating London-born author who wrote about life on the high seas.It reads: “The next monster down for notice is a very good specimen of the deep-sea chimaera‚ Chiasmodon niger. It is a veritable nightmare in appearance‚ being entirely black in color‚ with a mouth that cleaves the head asunder laterally for its whole length‚ so that vulgarly speaking‚ when its mouth is wide open it has no profile.”“Its immense mouth is furnished with equally effective teeth‚ which are not only found in the jaws but on the palate also. Its front teeth are hooked and movable‚ so that while they may be pushed inward to admit the entrance of prey‚ they effectually prevent it from coming out. This peculiarity is explained by a slight examination of the creature’s feeding habits. It can and does swallow entire fish actually larger than itself – which sounds impossible‚ but it is not. For the belly of this atrocious glutton is like an India-rubber bladder which may be expanded amazingly‚” Bullen writes. Even in today's world of deep-sea exploration and remotely operated submersibles‚ black swallowers are rarely ever seen alive in their natural habitat. Given their terrifying reputation‚ perhaps that's not necessarily a bad thing...

Movies and TV shows give the impression of space stations as aseptic and squeaky-clean environments. But wherever there are humans‚ there are all the bacteria that we bring with us. Bacteria have found niches in the International Space Station (ISS) and since they can evolve pretty quickly‚ a species was seen becoming distinct from its earthly counterparts.The bacteria in question are strains of Enterobacter bugandensis. This is an opportunistic pathogen‚ meaning that it can cause disease only if the host is already &;quot;perturbed&;quot;‚ such as if they are battling disease already or if they are immunocompromised. The bacteria is notorious for being multi-drug resistant‚ meaning that several antibiotic treatments are no longer effective in fighting it off. So it is important to understand what this bacteria is like in orbit.  Five strains of this bacterium were found on the ISS in 2018‚ and new work reports the existence of 13 strains on the space station. While the previous analysis reported similarities‚ the more in-depth genetic work suggests that under the stress of such a unique environment‚ the ISS strains could have mutated in multiple ways to become both genetically and functionally distinct from the E. bugandensis we find on Earth.“We identified certain genes from our study that are exclusively present in organisms associated with the ISS‚ but not in their terrestrial counterpart‚” the authors wrote in the paper.Understanding how bacteria evolve in space is important to protect the health of astronauts and also to work out alternative approaches to fight off these pathogens. In the case of these freshly evolved strains‚ their adaptation to microgravity might hide their Achilles’ heels.“These genes could potentially serve as valuable targets for therapeutics against pathogenic microorganisms in the unique environment of the IS‚” the authors continued.The research team admits some limitations in the genetic analysis so they cannot say without any doubt that these strains are the way they are because of space and space alone. Still‚ there is plenty of compelling evidence and they even go on to show how these strains are integrated into communities of many different bacteria‚ some of them also opportunistic pathogens that are resistant to multiple drugs.This coexistence could be another factor that has helped the organisms to successfully find their niches in the low-gravity‚ high-radiation‚ and elevated-carbon-dioxide environment of the ISS.The study is published in the journal Microbiome.

A new study suggests that patients who are treated by female doctors have lower mortality rates and are readmitted less frequently when compared to their male colleagues. Although the study did not set out to explain this outcome‚ it is possibly because female doctors are better at communicating with patients.Is there a gender bias in treatment outcomes&;#63;Sex disparities in health care and hospital outcomes are well known. For decades‚ there have been various studies that have shown how female patients are less likely to receive intensive care and related procedures than men‚ are more likely to experience delayed diagnoses‚ and tend to have more negative patient experiences too. At the same time‚ research has shown that female patients are more likely to be dismissed and to have their pain or symptoms underestimated by doctors.Similarly‚ multiple studies have now shown that receiving treatment from female physicians and surgeons often leads to better outcomes. For instance‚ in 2017‚ a large-scale study found that patients operated on by a female surgeon had a significantly lower chance (12 percent) of dying during the following 30 days of recovery. Then‚ in 2023‚ another team found that patients operated on by female surgeons tended to lower rates of adverse post-operative outcomes.However‚ despite the growing body of literature on the potential impact of physician sex on patient outcomes‚ there is still little evidence on whether these effects of physician sex on clinical outcomes varies depending on patient sex. This is where the new study comes in.Female doctors and improved outcomesThe researchers examined data for nearly 800‚000 patients (458‚108 female and 318‚819 male) who were covered by Medicare‚ a US health insurance program designed for people over 65 years of age‚ younger people with disabilities‚ and those with end-stage renal disease. The patients had all been hospitalized between 2016 and 2019 and were in hospitals that provided care and treatments for serious illnesses and injuries.The results are interesting. Patients – male and female – appear to have better rates of survival and were less likely to be readmitted within 30 days of leaving the hospital if they were treated by a female doctor. The benefits of receiving care from female doctors was more clinically meaningful for female patients when compared to male ones. Female patients had an 8.15 percent mortality rate when treated by a female doctor‚ compared to 8.38 percent when treated by a male doctor. This may appear small on the face of it‚ but it is a clinically significant difference when you consider the number of lives that represents.When it came to men‚ those treated by a female doctor had a 10.15 percent mortality rate compared to 10.23 percent when treated by a male doctor. However‚ the team admit that this is too small a difference to rule out the influence of chance.For readmissions or repeat hospitalization within 30 days of leaving‚ female patients had a 15.51 percent readmission rate when cared for by female doctors. This is compared to a 16.01 percent rate when treated by a male doctor. Similarly‚ male patients had a 15.65 percent readmission rate when treated by a female doctor‚ compared to 15.87 percent rate when treated by a male. This was also considered too small to rule out the role of chance.While the results demonstrate that patients treated by female doctors tend to experience better outcomes‚ this does not mean male doctors are bad at their jobs or that someone seeking care should choose a female physician over a male.It does‚ however‚ indicate that there may be gendered difference between how doctors interact with patients.As the team conclude in their study‚ “There are several potential mechanisms through which treatment by female physicians may be associated with better outcomes among female patients but not among male patients.”Firstly‚ male doctors may underestimate illness severity among female patients.“Underappreciation of symptoms and risks among female patients may result in delayed or incomplete care‚ ultimately leading to poorer patient outcomes”‚ the team explain. “These issues may be exacerbated by the limited opportunities for systematic medical training in women’s health in general medical curricula.”Secondly‚ being treated by a female doctor may be associated with patient-centred communication‚ especially among female patients.“Ineffective communication hinders patients from providing crucial information for accurate diagnoses and treatment‚ potentially leading to suboptimal outcomes.”Thirdly‚ being treated by a female doctor may also alleviate embarrassment‚ discomfort and social-cultural taboos that may arise from sensitive examinations or conversations.“Female patients who receive care from male physicians may experience incomplete physical examinations”‚ the authors add.The researchers add that future work needs to examine and identify the underlying mechanism that lead to these differences in patient outcomes‚ especially in relation to female patients and why they benefit from being treated by female doctors.The paper is published in the journal Annals of International Medicine.

Matyas Moravec: Modern physics suggests time may be an illusion. Einstein’s theory of relativity‚ for example‚ suggests the universe is a static‚ four-dimensional block that contains all of space and time simultaneously – with no special “now”. What’s the future to one observer‚ is the past to another. That means time doesn’t flow from past to future‚ as we experience it. This clashes with how time is conceptualised in other areas of physics‚ such as quantum mechanics‚ however. So is time an illusion or not&;#63; One approach to find out would be to try to prove that time is unreal using logic alone. In 1908‚ J.M.E. McTaggart‚ an English philosopher‚ published a paper arguing that we might be able to work out the unreality of time just using logical thinking alone. Imagine that someone has given you a box of cards‚ each one representing an event. One card describes the year 2024‚ another one the death of Queen Victoria‚ and another the solar eclipse in 2026. The cards have been mixed up. You have been told to arrange these cards in a way that represents time. How would you go about doing it&;#63; The first way is to use what McTaggart calls the “B-series”. You pick one card and place it on the floor. Then you take another one from the box and compare it with the one already on the floor. If it’s earlier‚ you put it to the left of it. If later‚ you put it to the right. For example‚ the death of Queen Victoria goes to the left of the 2026 solar eclipse. The year 2024 goes to the left of the 2026 solar eclipse‚ but to the right of the death of Queen Victoria. You keep repeating this until you end up with a line of cards‚ any two of which are related using the earlier-later relation. As you sit and look at the finished arrangement‚ you realise that something is missing. The line of cards is static. Once the cards have been put in place‚ nothing about their order changes. But‚ as McTaggart insists‚ you cannot have time without change. Time is ultimately a measure of change‚ even according to physics. It is often identified as a rise in disorder – entropy – of a closed system. Take a cup of hot coffee. As it cools down‚ entropy rises. And you can tell roughly how long a cup of coffee has been standing there by its temperature. Any device that measures time‚ such as a clock‚ relies on change (ticks). Remember‚ your original job was to arrange the cards in a way that represents time. But you ended up with something that doesn’t change. It would be odd to say that time does not change. So the B-series cannot capture time. There is‚ however‚ another option. You can start again and try to arrange the cards using what McTaggart calls the “A-series”. You create three neat piles – on the left go all the cards describing events that happened in the past‚ like the death of Queen Victoria. In the middle go those happening in the present‚ like the year 2024. And on the right‚ those that will happen in the future‚ like the 2026 solar eclipse. Unlike the B-series‚ this arrangement is not static. As time goes on‚ you have to move the cards from the right (future) pile into the middle (present) pile‚ and the ones from the (present) middle pile into the left (past) pile‚ where they stay forever. So there is clearly change happening here. Does that mean that the A-series describes time&;#63; According to McTaggart‚ the A-series is circular. Your hand moving the cards from the left-hand pile into the middle one and then into the right-hand pile is a process that already happens in time. You need to be in time to be able to perform this arrangement. But time is exactly what you are trying to capture. In other words‚ you already need to have time in order to describe time. This is circular‚ and circularity violates logic. Let’s sum up. The B-series arrangement cannot describe time‚ because nothing changes about it. And change is required for time. So the B-series doesn’t work. The A-series does change‚ but unfortunately‚ it is circular. So it doesn’t work either. Since neither of these works‚ McTaggart concludes that time cannot be real. A hundred years later Over a hundred years later‚ philosophers are still searching for a solution. Some‚ called “A-theorists” try to define the A-series in a way that’s not circular. Others‚ called “B-theorists”‚ accept that the B-series describes reality and say that McTaggart was wrong to require the series to change. Maybe all there is to time is just a line of events. There are also “C-theorists” who go further and say that the line of cards does not even have a direction from earlier to later. The year 2024 goes between the death of Queen Victoria and the 2026 solar eclipse. But the fact that we’re used to thinking of the death of Queen Victoria coming before the 2026 solar eclipse‚ rather than the other way around‚ is perhaps just a matter of habit. It’s like numbering planks on a fence: you can start from whatever end you want. The fence itself has no direction. I’m not yet convinced that any of them are right‚ perhaps there are different ways of thinking about time altogether. Ultimately‚ time will tell. And regardless of who’s right‚ what is remarkable is that McTaggart was able to get the argument going without any findings from science‚ but purely by thinking logically about the problem. Matyas Moravec‚ Gifford Postdoctoral Fellow in Philosophy‚ University of St Andrews This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. The post How logic alone may prove that time doesn’t exist appeared first on Anomalien.com.

Imagine a horse the size of a small car‚ with a heart just as expansive. Meet Phantom‚ a colossal horse standing an impressive 7 feet tall at the withers and tipping the scales at around 2‚000 pounds. Despite his towering presence‚ Phantom carries the demeanor of a gentle giant. Affectionate‚ friendly‚ and unexpectedly playful‚ he... The post Gentle giant horse melts hearts ‘teaching’ neglected elderly horse the joys of playing appeared first on Animal Channel.

For years‚ the liberal media have constantly lost their noodles over the alleged‚ supposed crime that Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) is a walking campaign violation for co-hosting a hit podcast that’s been three years running‚ Verdict With Ted Cruz. Originally launched during the first Trump impeachment with Daily Wire host Michael Knowles‚ the show continues to publish episodes three times a week alongside longtime conservative talk show host and commentator Ben Ferguson. The liberal media helped set the table with a litany of sites coincidentally publishing nearly identical stories. Here’s the headline from one of two stories by the tools at the Daily Beast: “The Ugly Truth Behind Ted Cruz’s Super PAC Podcast”. And Newsweek — which has an unhealthy obsession with the junior senator from Texas — had not one but two stories waving pomp pomps about said complaint. Here was the headline for one of them: “Ted Cruz Faces Second Investigation in Less Than a Year”. Expand the scope and there was everyone from local and state media (the Austin American-Statesman‚ Dallas Morning News‚ Houston Chronicle‚ Texas Monthly‚ Texas Tribune‚ and Laredo Morning Times to name a few) to liberal gadflys at Business Insider‚ The New Republic‚ Raw Story‚ and Rolling Stone. As for the complaint‚ National Review’s James Lynch wrote last week that‚ along with the constant liberal belly-aching‚ “[l]eft-wing legal and advocacy groups are targeting” him for alleged “campaign finance issues” just so conveniently as the general election between Cruz and Congressman Colin Allred (D-TX) begins in earnest. Lynch explained that “[t]he Campaign Legal Center (CLC) and End Citizens United‚ two left-leaning watchdog groups‚ filed a complaint last week with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) accusing Cruz of campaign finance violations by putting podcast ad revenue towards a pro-Cruz super PAC.” “The complaint demands the FEC investigate the situation and accuses Cruz of violating campaign finance laws prohibiting corporations from contributing directly to campaigns‚” he added. With some help from the Capital Research Center‚ Lynch revealed to what’s probably no surprise to you‚ NewsBusters readers‚ that said groups are funded by none other than George Soros: Left-wing foundations such as the Sandler Foundation‚ Ford Foundation‚ McArthur Foundation‚ and George Soros’ Foundation to Promote Open Society have bankrolled the Campaign Legal Center‚ according to Influence Watch‚ a project by watchdog think tank Capital Research Center. “Campaign Legal Center is a Soros-funded left-wing attack group‚ and its 501(c)(4) arm was a puppet of Sam Bankman-Fried‚ the disgraced ex-crypto-billionaire who gave Democrats almost as much cash as Soros. End Citizens United is little better than a scam PAC and endorses Democratic candidates. In short‚ Sen. Cruz is lucky in his enemies‚ because these groups disgrace themselves when they pretend to be nonpartisan watchdogs‚” Capital Research Center President Scott Walter told National Review. CLC has repeatedly targeted Cruz with ethics complaints‚ and each time the complaints have been rebuked. In 2022‚ CLC filed an ethics complaint to the Senate ethics committee accusing him of improperly accepting a gift from iHeart media. The Senate Ethics Committee shot down the CLC complaint. A Cruz spokesman called it “bewildering to see...lazy attacks during an election year”‚ particularly on something he does “for free”. Cruz himself spoke to Houston-area CBS affiliate KHOU about this nonsense and tore into these leftist “front groups” looking to engage in election interference (click “expand”): There are two groups that file these complaints. And they’re both Democrat front groups. So what they do every election cycle is they file complaints against Republicans. And that’s what they exist to do—create news stories that are just attack vehicles. It’s interesting because these same groups previously filed a complaint...about my podcast...The Senate Ethics Committee dismissed it and said that [my podcast] is entirely consistent with law...I’m very proud of my Podcast...Verdict with Ted Cruz. I do it three days a week‚ and we have nearly a million people across Texas and across the country who tune in. The reason that I do the podcast is to tell Texans and Americans what’s happening in Washington...I do it because much of the media refuses to report the news fairly. And so people are turning to podcasts to understand what’s really going on...The podcast is something I’m very proud of. I think it’s integral to my job as a Senator to talk to Texans about what is happening in the U.S. Senate that affects the state of Texas and to talk to Texans about the threats that they are facing‚ whether from open borders‚ releasing criminals‚ or Iran getting billions of dollars from the Biden administration—all of which are topics that I have discussed at great length on the podcast.

With all that is occurring in our political and cultural life‚ there are signs some Americans have had enough. Google recently fired 28 employees from its New York and Sunnyvale‚ California‚ offices for protesting the company’s cloud-computing contract with Israel. The reason given by the company’s vice president for global security‚ Chris Rackow‚ as reported in The Wall Street Journal‚ was that the sacked employees “took over office spaces‚ defaced our property and physically impeded the work of other Googlers‚” violating company policies. They apparently aren’t familiar with this sage advice: don’t bite the hand that feeds you. Another optimistic sign. Columbia University decided they had enough of protesters disrupting the campus and shouting antisemitic‚ anti-Israel and pro-Hamas slogans. Police were called and arrested 108 protesters who had set up shanty-like tent camps on school property. Columbia President Minouche Shafik said the occupiers posed a “clear and present danger to the substantial functioning of the University.” The definition of “student” ought to bring some humility to these don’t-know-it-alls: “ a person formally engaged in learning.” For too long and in too many places – and not only on many college campuses – adults have ceded their leadership responsibilities to teenagers and twenty-somethings‚ too many of whom regurgitate what they have been told by leftist professors and friends on social media. At Columbia‚ at least three tenured professors dispense propaganda about the history of the Middle East. The New York Post identified them: “ Joseph Massad‚ a professor of modern Arab politics and history‚ has faced widespread calls to be fired ever since he referred to the Oct. 7 attack inflicted by Hamas terrorists (on Israel) as ‘awesome.’” Mohamed Abdou‚ who is described on Columbia’s website as “a North African-Egyptian Muslim anarchist interdisciplinary activist-scholar of Indigenous‚ Black‚ critical race and Islamic studies‚ as well as gender‚ sexuality‚ abolition and decolonization.” Abdou declared on social media‚ “Yes‚ I’m with Hamas and Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad.” There is also Hamad Dabashi‚ a professor of Iranian studies. The Post reports Dabashi “has come under fire in recent years for a slew of controversial social media posts‚ including a since-deleted one in which he blamed Israel for every “dirty” problem in the world: “Every dirty treacherous ugly and pernicious happening in the world just wait for a few days and the ugly name ‘Israel’ will pop up in the atrocities‚’ Dabashi wrote in a 2018 Facebook post‚ cited by the Jewish Journal.” There are likely more professors with views like these at Columbia and elsewhere‚ but you get the picture. It may be a generalization‚ but too many young people have been treated as though they were the font of all wisdom while older‚ wiser‚ and more experienced people have been sidelined and their views silenced. Few speak of responsibility or accountability for actions once deemed illegal‚ immoral‚ impractical‚ uninformed‚ duped and just plain stupid. Students who take out big loans to learn propaganda and worthless subjects at too many universities now expect those loans to be forgiven at taxpayer expense. When I flunked out after my freshman year at American University in Washington‚ my father said he wasn’t going to pay the bills anymore. When I went back a year later and paid my own way a remarkable thing happened. My grades went up because I was now invested in my education and had to take responsibility for the outcome. I also paid back my student loan. Let’s hope that others follow the lead of Columbia’s president and Google management and we stop wet nursing kids who for too long have demonstrated their ignorance and in some cases denounced America while reaping its benefits.

Elon Musk has been targeted by yet another authoritarian government for his company X’s reluctance to censor political content.  In an April 23 interview with Sky News‚ Tasmanian Senator Jacqui Lambie appeared to threaten Elon Musk over his well-known advocacy for free speech and the way his company X handles political content on its platform‚ specifically X’s refusal to censor videos of recent attacks in Australia‚ contradicting the orders of the country’s eSafety commission.  Lambie engaged in a vitriolic spree against the tech mogul and considerably blackened his character. “So when it comes to the tech billionaire‚ like I’ve already said‚ I think he’s a social media nob with no social conscience‚” Lambie said. “He has absolutely no social conscience.” The senator then proceeded to issue explicit threats against Musk‚ advocating for him to be imprisoned. “Someone like that should be in jail‚ and the key be thrown away‚” Lambie asserted. “That bloke should not have a right to be out there on his own ideology platform and creating hatred‚ you know‚ showing all this stuff out there to our kids and all the rest.” Australian politicians want to shut down X and imprison Elon Musk because free speech is a danger to their fragile democracy that’s run by fragile‚ pathetic people. You couldn’t make this up. pic.twitter.com/mEBLqMtO6f — Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) April 23‚ 2024 In another interview‚ Lambie made her threats even more explicit and suggested that the  Australian government should introduce new rules to target X. “And quite frankly‚ the bloke [sic] should be jailed‚ and the sooner we can bring rules in or do something about these sorts of game-playing with their social media‚ the better off we’re going to be.” Lambie did not immediately respond to MRC Free Speech America’s request for comment. She is not the first Australian political figure to try to criticize the tech mogul for protecting the free expression of X users. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has also taken issue with X’s handling of what he terms “misinformation” and “disinformation.” “By and large‚ people responded appropriately to the calls by the [eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant]‚” Albanese recently commented. “They stand‚ I think … I find it extraordinary that X chose not to comply and trying to argue their case.” Albanese appeared to rationalize his stance against the rights of X users by arguing that it was simply the will of Australians. “We know‚ I think‚ overwhelmingly Australians want misinformation and disinformation to stop‚” he said.  The controversy comes after X was ordered by Grant on April 16 to take down two videos of stabbings.  One video depicted a bishop and a priest being stabbed during a live-streamed mass‚ and the other video showed a knife-wielding assailant killing six at a mall. X refused to comply with the request because its Global Government Affairs team argued that the request was not within the scope of Australian law nor did the videos violate X’s own policies.  As reported by Time Magazine‚ the orders required X to make the videos inaccessible even to users outside Australia or face a fine of $785‚000 AUD (about $500‚000 USD).               Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency‚ clarity on so-called hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored‚ contact us at the Media Research Center contact form‚ and help us hold Big Tech accountable.  

Sunday’s edition of PBS News Weekend spent 13 minutes out of its allotted 25 taking the loose liberal attitude toward homelessness (“the unhoused”) as a Supreme Court case looms. PBS found yet another liberal‚ an assistant public health professor at Cornell University‚ to make its preferred ideological case in the first segment‚ arguing an Oregon law limiting homeless camping in public spaces punishes people for being on the streets. JOHN YANG: Tomorrow‚ the Supreme Court hears arguments about whether laws limiting homeless encampments in public places are unconstitutional because they punish people for being homeless. The case is about laws in Grants Pass‚ Oregon‚ a city of about 40‚000 in the state’s southwest corner‚ but the outcome could reshape policies nationwide for years to come. CHARLEY WILLISON‚ Cornell University: ….cities generally use much more punitive policies‚ these criminalization approaches that are at the heart of Johnson vs. Grants Pass to effectively punish people who are experiencing homelessness for behaviors that are associated with the realities of homelessness. Now‚ importantly‚ the use of these punitive policies actually facilitate cycles of homelessness and does not effectively end homelessness…. (Willison would throw in another “punitive” description before she was done.) Asked about Florida’s new camping ban‚ she responded similarly: “So these camping bans and other broadly punitive responses again‚ where we see people who are experiencing homelessness being either fined through civil penalties or criminalized through criminal penalties for realities associated with homelessness….” She responded to Yang’s question about a new California law to provide more drug treatment with liberal fantasizing‚ with no opposing views from Yang: ….For example‚ having more accountability‚ where cities are required to spend a certain proportion of their budgets on housing will likely help improve the situation and require cities to engage in these evidence-based policies which are far more effective. The anchor transitioned directly to a field report from Montana‚ with reporter Joe Lesar of Montana PBS speaking to Steve and Belinda Ankney‚ “[who] have been living in their trailer on the streets of Bozeman for the past three years.” Lesar admitted “Both have struggled with addiction” and Belinda has been previously jailed‚ which she blamed on “not getting the right help‚ not being on the right meds.” Lesar: To tackle this growing issue‚ Bozeman recently implemented a new ordinance limiting camping in the same spot to 30 days with an option for filing for an extension. There are rules about keeping camps clean‚ and after three warnings $25 civil penalties will be issued…. The reporter at least provided some anecdotes from citizens helping pay for homeless upkeep‚ with the head of an environmental consulting firm noting he’d suffered thefts on his company’s property and the harassment of an employee. But he ended with the view of a hand-wringing social worker and a lecture from the trailer-living denizen: Heather Grenier‚ Human Resources Development Council: Just general sentiment that everyone deserves the safe warm place to sleep is that doesn’t really resonate with everyone anymore. Steve Ankney: “….there are good people in Bozeman‚ just the ugly overshadows the good so bad.” The segment ended with a graphic of a federal government statistic claiming a 551% increase in “individuals experiencing chronic patterns of homelessness” from 2007 to 2023‚ which is a bit vague. When even the liberal Washington Post editorial page admits “There is no constitutional right to pitch your tent on the sidewalk” -- the kind of common-sense argument absent from PBS -- it’s clear that taxpayer-supported outlets like PBS and National Public Radio are pitched far to the left of the average American taxpayer who is involuntarily supporting them. This segment was brought to you in part by Consumer Cellular‚ and taxpayers like you. A transcript is available‚ click “Expand.” PBS News Weekend 4/21/2024 7:12:56 p.m. (ET) JOHN YANG: Tomorrow‚ the Supreme Court hears arguments about whether laws limiting homeless encampments in public places are unconstitutional because they punish people for being homeless. The case is about laws in Grants Pass‚ Oregon‚ a city of about 40‚000 in the state southwest corner‚ but the outcome could reshape policies nationwide for years to come. Charley Willison teaches public health at Cornell University. She`s the author of &;quot;Ungoverned and Out of Sight: Public Health and the Political Crisis of Homelessness in the United States.&;quot; Charley‚ in the filings for this case Grants Pass as well there these laws are about public health and public safety. The two homeless people who have brought this case say it`s really about pushing homeless people out of the -- out of Grants Pass getting them to move on to go someplace else. What`s your take on that&;#63; CHARLEY WILLISON‚ Cornell University: This is such an important question. And what this case is really getting at is a deep tension that American cities face when thinking about how to respond to homelessness across the country‚ but especially in West Coast cities that have very limited shelter capacity‚ and are also in the midst of a housing crisis. And these two tensions that I`d like to emphasize are that cities generally use much more punitive policies these criminalization approaches that are at the heart of Johnson versus Grants Pass to effectively punish people who are experiencing homelessness for behaviors that are associated with the realities of homelessness. Now‚ importantly‚ the use of these punitive policies actually facilitate cycles of homelessness and does not effectively end homelessness. While the alternative addressing homelessness through the use of more housing‚ as well as housing paired with access to social and medical services‚ does successfully end homelessness. However‚ we have seen cities across the United States have much less emphasis on the use of housing and supportive services compared to these punitive policies that are at the heart of this case. JOHN YANG: But at the same time‚ these camping bans are really spreading just this spring. Governor DeSantis and Florida signed a ban statewide banning camping in public places. But you say this really doesn`t help homelessness is it‚ does it hurt it&;#63; CHARLEY WILLISON: So these camping bans and other broadly punitive responses again‚ where we see people who are experiencing homelessness being either find through civil penalties or criminalized through criminal penalties for realities associated with homelessness‚ whether it is sleeping in public sitting down in public eating public‚ things like this do actually promote cycles of homelessness. Now‚ the Florida law that is in question is a ban on camping. However‚ it is also using an interim solution where there are temporary shelters and that will hopefully be used‚ as opposed to criminalizing people. So banning camping as opposed to incarcerating people‚ or finding people directing people into temporary shelters‚ which appear to be sanctioned camping sites. JOHN YANG: What about the ballot proposal that narrowly passed earlier this year in California that directs counties to spend more money on housing programs and drug treatment programs&;#63; Will that help&;#63; Will that make a difference&;#63; CHARLEY WILLISON: Proposition one in California‚ which passed just about a month ago‚ this raises the issue of the housing crisis itself‚ and the need for West Coast cities in particular‚ but especially cities across the United States‚ to engage in more housing based solutions‚ which are the only solution that effectively successfully ends homelessness. Across the country having these investments and in California‚ especially where there are by far very limited or far more limited shelter and housing opportunities compared to other East Coast cities. For example‚ having more accountability‚ where cities are required to spend a certain proportion of their budgets on housing will likely help improve the situation and require cities to engage in these evidence based policies which are far more effective. JOHN YANG: From your perspective‚ what`s the public health issue or what`s the public health effect implications of homelessness&;#63; CHARLEY WILLISON: There are many‚ many grave public health effects of homelessness. If we think about homelessness‚ in general‚ people experiencing homelessness‚ whether it is short term or long term face group far greater morbidity and mortality compared to the general population. And this is both in the short term and the long term. For example‚ we know that people who are experiencing sheltered homelessness‚ so this is when they don`t have to sleep outside‚ they have a place to go their mortality rates are about three times higher than the general population. Whereas people who are experiencing unsheltered homelessness‚ which is the population that is at the heart of this court case‚ have mortality rates are about 10 times higher than the general population. So when we`re thinking about population health and homelessness is absolutely a public health problem because of the grave and dire consequences for people and their health in these ways. JOHN YANG: In your view‚ what`s at stake in this case&;#63; CHARLEY WILLISON: There are many things at stake in this case‚ but I would say probably the most important thing is again‚ going back to this tension‚ where cities have placed a lot of very robust resources in these punitive responses to homelessness. Now‚ if they are allowed to continue to do this‚ the question will be whether or not cities will be incentivized to create these alternative solutions using housing paired with social medical services‚ which we know actually successfully ends homelessness. However‚ if the court rules in favor of Johnson‚ we I think this is a very big opportunity for cities to engage in these evidence based solutions and make investments especially in West Coast cities‚ where they have not previously done so‚ so that we may actually successfully reduce and end homelessness. JOHN YANG: Charley Willison of Cornell University. Thank you very much. CHARLEY WILLISON: Thank you so much. JOHN YANG: In some cities with growing numbers of homeless people‚ the issue goes beyond encampments and public places. They`re also coping with more people living in cars and RVs parked on city streets. Montana PBS`s Joe Lesar reports on how city leaders in Bozeman Montana are dealing with the tensions arising from this more visible display of homelessness. STEVEN ANKNEY‚ Bozeman resident: Terry‚ oh‚ man‚ you got to have thick skin out here. BELINDA ANKNEY‚ Bozeman resident: Oh‚ we got the windows broke out. Not went up there. It`s just completely gone. STEVEN ANKNEY: Yeah‚ that one`s had the BB come through there. JOE LESAR (voice-over): Steve and Belinda Ankney‚ have been living in their trailer on the streets of Bozeman for the past three years. STEVEN ANKNEY: We take plates around or if people are having a hard time and they`re not eating‚ they`ll stop by and ask if we can help her anyway. JOE LESAR (voice-over): The rising cost of living has only compounded issues they I`ve been facing for years.   BELINDA ANKNEY: I was raised with the drugs. I was raised with the alcohol. That`s all I knew. JOE LESAR (voice-over): Both have struggled with addiction. Belinda works full time at a restaurant. But health issues made worse by inconsistent access to care have affected Steven`s ability to work. BELINDA ANKNEY: One of the biggest misconceptions is that we want to be here that we`re not trying to get out. JOE LESAR (voice-over): Belinda`s legal troubles out another barrier to securing housing. BELINDA ANKNEY: Yeah‚ the mental health issues. The drug issues the in and out of incarceration not getting the right help not being on the right meds‚ you know‚ just as (inaudible). JOE LESAR (voice-over): Urban camping as it`s been named‚ has increased by 200 percent in the last two years‚ according to city officials. It`s a growing issue. It`s increasingly dividing Bozeman. WOMAN: If Bozeman is too expensive to live in‚ choose another place to live. MAN: But it feels more like a warzone with all these housing crises and no solutions to anything. MAN: Bozeman doesn`t owe anybody anything. MAN: I`ve never seen or been in a city where there`s so much conflict over how this homelessness thing. JOE LESAR (voice-over): To tackle this growing issue‚ Bozeman recently implemented a new ordinance limiting camping in the same spot to 30 days with an option for filing for an extension. There are rules about keeping camps clean‚ and after three warnings $25 civil penalties will be issued. If unsanitary conditions continue‚ the city can clear camp 72 hours after giving notice. But some are criticizing city leaders for putting too much of a burden on the unhoused. Others feel they`re being too lenient. Mayor Terry Cunningham says the rules about where camping will be allowed will help make the situation more manageable. MAYOR TERRY CUNNINGHAM‚ Bozeman‚ Montana: You can`t be parked in front of a business‚ you can`t be parked in front of a school‚ childcare facility‚ residence‚ et cetera. So narrowing the areas that it is acceptable to camp in front of is important so we can get some level of predictability and control. JOE LESAR (voice-over): But many camps are already in compliance with those rules. A group of businesses are suing the city alleging that it is refusing to enforce existing laws within the homeless encampments. Andrew Hinnenkamp runs one of the businesses involved in the lawsuit. ANDREW HINNENKAMP‚ Principal‚ Modulus Corporation: Early on‚ we had some thefts of services on the property. We had a little bit of a harassment interaction with an employee and one of the individuals. TERRY CUNNINGHAM: homelessness has always been on the radar. This with urban camping RV`s‚ more cars. This is a recent phenomenon. JOE LESAR (voice-over): Because of the generators‚ new model cars and TV antennas‚ there`s a sentiment in Bozeman that people are choosing to camp in order to save money on housing. City officials acknowledged that some people are doing that and will be asked to move on. But figuring out who those people are comes with challenges. TERRY CUNNINGHAM: One of the difficulties is having the discussion and saying why are you currently homeless&;#63; We -- they are not required to provide us with that information and often are uncomfortable answering those types of questions. JOE LESAR (voice-over): The population of people experiencing homelessness in Bozeman has increased by 50 percent since 2020. In the groups providing services to this growing population have struggled to meet the demand. HEATHER GRENIER‚ President‚ Human Resources Development Council: As a result of COVID there was this big uptick in demand and there was this outpouring of support. And now that outpouring of support has dropped off‚ but the demand has stayed up at this level and the resources are very insufficient to meet the need. JOE LESAR (voice-over): Heather Grenier‚ who runs the nonprofit Human Resource Development Council‚ says her organization`s caseload is at capacity. And there are not many alternatives available. HEATHER GRENIER: It`s remarkably difficult because there`s no pathway for us to help them. There`s no housing. There`s no rental assistance to help them get into housing. And even if there were a housing unit‚ there`s no transitional housing. JOE LESAR (voice-over): Usage of HRDC overnight shelter has nearly doubled since 2019. Some of that needs should be eased when they`re new 24/7 shelter opens‚ but that`s not expected until next year. Grenier believes this newer‚ more visible form of homelessness has caused a shift in attitudes around Bozeman. HEATHER GRENIER: Just general sentiment that everyone deserves the safe warm place to sleep is that doesn`t really resonate with everyone anymore. BELINDA ANKNEY: Are we out&;#63; Are we out for it&;#63; STEVEN ANKNEY: No. I`ve seen not. I don`t know. BELINDA ANKNEY: OK. JOE LESAR (voice-over): Cost between a lack of services and a frustrated community‚ are people like Steven and Belinda&;#63; STEVEN ANKNEY: There are good people in Bozeman there. Yeah. It`s just the ugly overshadows the good so bad. This is what it`s about. We are having me struggles and we are having these problems. But as soon as we get through them‚ we are going to be okay. We are going to get to the other side. JOE LESAR (voice-over): Yeah. For PBS News Weekend‚ I`m Joe Lesar in Bozeman‚ Montana.