Justin Gest (@_JustinGest) is an associate professor at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. He is the author of " The New Minority: White Working Class Politics in an Age of Immigration and Inequality " and, with Anna Boucher, " Crossroads: Comparative Immigration Regimes in a World of Demographic Change ." The views expressed in this commentary are his own. View more opinion on CNN. (CNN) During four years in office, President Donald Trump reduced immigration admissions in every way that American law makes possible without congressional approval -- cutting refugee numbers, deporting law-abiding members of American citizens' families and then finally halting all entry to the US amid the pandemic for a period before blocking the issuance of new green cards. In 2020, virtually zero migration was no longer just a thought experiment; it was, at least for a period of time, policy. Justin Gest As the US government now grapples with a backlog of asylum-seekers and immigrants at the southern border, a team of economists, demographers and I modeled what America would be like if those earlier policies were to continue hereafter. Commissioned by the bipartisan immigration advocacy group FWD.us, our independent research used the most recent US Census and economic data to project the outcomes of a variety of different policy scenarios -- one that cuts immigration to zero as Trump effectively did in 2020; one that cuts immigration admissions in half; one that extends recent levels; one that increases recent levels by 50%; and one that doubles recent levels. The general trend in our modeling is clear: the more immigrants, the merrier. In short, if immigration remained at near-zero levels, within decades, the country could be older, smaller and poorer. But if the US government welcomed more newcomers, within decades, the country could be younger, more productive and richer. ...
Annika sorenstam whats in the bag
What Should You Do With COVID-19 Vaccination Card After Getting Both Doses?
(CBS Local)- Vaccination rates in the U.S. continue to rise with the latest data from the Centers For Disease Control showing that roughly half of the country’s population has received at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. The percentage of people who are fully vaccinated sits right around 30 percent of Americans. As more and more people receive their full allotment of the vaccine, the question is what do you do with the vaccine card afterwards? The CDC recommends taking a picture of the card as a backup in the event that you lose it. In addition, the agency says you should hold on to your card in case you need it for future use. READ MORE: COVID-19 In Pittsburgh: Allegheny Co. Health Dept. Reports 428 New Cases, 1 Additional Death If you don’t receive a vaccination card at your visit, the CDC says you should contact the vaccination site provider or your state health department to get more information on how to get a card. Another question that arises surrounding the card is whether or not you should protect it by getting it laminated. Office supply stores like Office Depot and Staples have announced that they will laminate your vaccine card for free . However, some experts say that you shouldn’t laminate the card in case more information needs to be added to the card at a later date. With Pfizer’s CEO saying last week that it’s likely people will need a third dose between six and 12 months , it’s likely that more info will be needed to be added to those cards. READ MORE: Convicted Sex Offender In West Virginia Set Free After Prosecutor Error Cited But, Dr. Maureen Miller told CBS News that she’s in favor of laminating the cards because record-keeping of who has and hasn’t been vaccinated “will have evolved” by the time a booster shot comes. Should You Keep Your COVID-19 Vaccine Card With You In Public? Experts told CBS News that you should store the card someplace safe at home ideally keeping it with other important medical records and ...
What Are the Best Men’s White Sneakers?
Photo-Illustration: retailers A simple white sneaker has always been an essential part of any man’s shoe collection. Yes, their timeless appeal comes in handy when you’re putting together an outfit for the office or a date, but even if you’re only “getting dressed” to get groceries or take a walk, white sneakers can be just as much a go-to. So having the right pair in your arsenal may even force most other shoes out of your rotation. “They will never not be in style,” says Cory Ohlendorf, an editor of men’s-style site Valet . “When you think of all the eras of menswear, a basic white sneaker remains something you simply must own.” Underlying white sneakers’ versatility is the fact that, like black sneakers, they look good with almost all clothes. But, unlike black sneakers, white ones can be worn year-round, according to our cool guys. “That’s the beauty of a simple white sneaker,” says Nicolas Lazaro, a community specialist at menswear-resale platform Grailed . While sunny days scream for bright kicks, the best white sneakers also look better when weathered, making them just as fall and winter appropriate. As stylist Bryant Simmons puts it, the more wear they show, the more they suggest their wearer “has a life.” To find the best men’s white sneakers, we talked to Ohlendorf, Lazaro, Simmons, and ten more stylish guys (then went through our archives to make sure we didn’t miss any standout pairs recommended by other cool men). The 12 pairs below include something for most everyone, from canvas styles, to classic leather pairs, to slip-ons, to sneakers you can skate in, and more. Nike Air Force 1 $128 now 8% off $118 Three of our cool people say that Nike’s Air Force 1 is a classic white sneaker that hasn’t lost its cool in the decades its been around ( cool teens , athletes like Kevin Love , and celebrities like Fab 5 Freddy have told us they feel the same way). According to Simmons, they’re perhaps even ...
Justice Barrett Gets $2 Million Deal to Tell Readers What They Don’t Want to Hear
Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett has a cushy book deal. Photo: Pool/Getty Images This news from the publishing industry via Politico is pretty interesting: Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Trump’s last pick for the Supreme Court, has … sold a book — garnering a $2 million advance for a tome about how judges are not supposed to bring their personal feelings into how they rule, according to three publishing industry sources. The figure was “an eye-raising amount” for a Supreme Court justice and likely the most since book deals won by Clarence Thomas and Sandra Day O’Connor, one of the people added. You have to figure most of the people who will put down legal tender for a Barrett book are fans of her, of Donald Trump, and the cultural conservatism they believe she will eventually bring to the Court once she has settled in. Indeed, the reason her nomination was greeted with so many huzzahs from the Right is because it was assumed her “personal feelings” as an observant Catholic and as a professor at a Catholic university would be brought to bear on abortion jurisprudence, making her potentially that fifth critical vote to overturn Roe v. Wade . As Senator Elizabeth Warren observed in the Cut when Barrett was first nominated, Barrett’s “personal feelings” — amplified by the fact that, as a woman, she couldn’t be accused of not understanding how women regard reproductive issues — were precisely why Trump nominated her: [O] ver , and over , and over again, President Trump has bragged about his plans to appoint judges who would “automatically” overturn Roe … Barrett is Trump’s ideal candidate to accomplish his plans. In 2006, she signed a newspaper ad calling for the end of Roe and describing the decision as “barbaric.” She was a member of an anti-choice group while on the University of Notre Dame faculty. She’s also been critical of the Affordable Care Act and the Supreme Court’s past decision to uphold the law in court. Her ...
What the statistics show about police shootings and public safety
Whatever the verdict in the trial of former Minneapolis policeman Derek Chauvin for the killing of George Floyd, that case — and the tragedy of another death, this time of 20-year-old Daunte Wright during a traffic stop in nearby Brooklyn Center, Minn. — should not be used to advance the narrative of systemic police racism and brutality nationwide. No one has done more to save and protect Black lives — indeed, all lives — than the men and women in police uniforms. Among the victims in today’s social and racial upheaval are the overwhelming majority of innocent, hardworking people living in minority communities who are being victimized by nationwide spikes in violent crime. Their communities already are beset by a lack of job opportunities and quality education — neither of which is their fault, nor the fault of the police — yet now they are beset by increased crime as well. Police have become victims, too, as they are expected to do the impossible while being attacked from all sides and portrayed as excessively violent or trigger-happy. Any discussion of policing and crime, including police interactions with minorities, is complicated and often turned into an emotional debate by an array of factors , including the sources and causes of crime itself. ADVERTISEMENT But let’s consider some statistics on police actions. In New York City in 2018, 36,000 NYPD officers answered more than 6.1 million calls . In all of those calls, a total of 35 police shooting incidents were reported — despite one common refrain that the city’s police are trigger-happy. Of those 35 incidents, six involved police suicides or attempted suicides and four involved animals. So we are talking about barely .01 percent of shooting incidents, or 99.9 percent of police calls in which no shots were fired by the police. Not exactly a shooting gallery. More important than cold numbers are the human elements. In the early 1990s, New York City averaged 2,000 ...
