A disappearing act in Alaska ​Elizabeth Goldbaum Public Affairs Specialist Communications and Publishing Study Area Permafrost, as its name implies, should be permanently frozen soil; however, that’s no longer the case.

On a cool August morning almost a decade ago, Miriam Jones found herself in Alaska, standing in a forest filled with seemingly tipsy trees.  Although the leaning, centipede-like black spruce trees looked as if they had enjoyed boozy spirits soon before Jones’ arrival, their story wasn’t so lively. Rather, they leaned because they were literally standing on thawing soil.  ​

Trees tipping over and dying as ice-rich permafrost thaws in the Innoko National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska.

Underneath much of Alaska’s forests sits permafrost, or permanently frozen soil. “Permafrost is ground that stays frozen year-round for at least two consecutive years,” Jones, a research geologist with the U.S. Geological Survey, said.

Permafrost also happens to store a lot of carbon – 1,400 billion metric tons of it- which is more carbon than has ever been released by humans through fossil fuel combustion. “Most permafrost has been frozen for the last several thousand years, even up to hundreds of thousands of years,” Jones said.  

However, that’s starting to change. As the climate warms and permafrost thaws, the atmosphere could get a major injection of carbon dioxide and methane, both powerful greenhouse gases.  Permafrost thaw is a key part of the Administration’s 2022-2026 Arctic Research Plan, which aims to improve the collective impacts of federal agencies in Arctic research.

USGS scientists, like Jones, inform and support the Plan with their research.

   To better understand how permafrost is changing, Jones digs up long, skinny tubes of the frozen soil near the “Drunken Forests” to look for clues to how it formed and what might happen to it in the future. Although her first trip was a decade ago, she’s been back a few times, often returning home with a frozen time capsule to study. 

“Permafrost thaw could really change how we approach infrastructure development in the Arctic,” Jones said, “Not to mention the global impact to climate.” ​

Permafrost’s prowess on land 
A bridge that crosses a creek once filled with golden nuggets is sinking.  Anvil Creek was famous for its treasure during the Alaskan gold rush in the late 1890s, but since then, has sat under a bridge that’s part of the 70-mile-long Nome-Teller Road. This rural highway stretches over 70 miles of remote tundra and links the city of Nome to the Inupiat town of Teller, only 55 miles away from Russia.   

Permafrost "can cause a lot of damage to our infrastructure when it thaws,” the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities states on its website, impacting structures like the bridge over Anvil Creek.  

The department tries to avoid building on permafrost, although that isn’t always an option because the frozen soil hides under 85% of Alaska.

Officials can remove the permafrost and replace it with stable material or use techniques that help keep the ground frozen. For instance, the department installed foam board insulation on top of the Dalton Highway near Alaska’s North Slope to keep it cool during the summer. “The flip side is that it keeps the cold winter out as well, which prevents the cooling that helps to keep the permafrost cold,” the department says.

However, these options are expensive and don’t always work.  Permafrost thaw is also causing coastal erosion, creating dramatic landscapes and forcing some Alaskan residents to relocate their homes. 

​Since the early 2000s, coastal permafrost erosion in the Arctic has increased at 13 of 14 study sites, with observational data extending back approximately 50 years. The erosion coincides with warming temperatures, sea ice reduction, and permafrost thaw. 
​

Permafrost’s perturbations to the atmosphere  This potential carbon source is a big deal, because for most of human history, permafrost has captured and stored carbon as frozen plant and animal remains, and the amount of stored carbon has been higher than that lost to the atmosphere through decomposition. ​

USGS researcher Benjamin Jones examines a collapsed block of ice-rich permafrost on Barter Island along Alaska's Arctic coast.

   However, as the planet warms, this trend could reverse.   “There are efforts to use soils and forests to store carbon, but permafrost is working in the opposite direction,” Waldrop said. “Land managers want to know how to keep carbon in the ground rather than see it released into the atmosphere.” 

Permafrost secrets revealed 
To understand how thawing permafrost could affect the global carbon cycle, which tracks carbon as it moves between the atmosphere (usually as carbon dioxide) and Earth (trapped in rocks, soils, and the ocean), Jones and her colleagues study both intact permafrost in forests and thawed permafrost from peatlands.  

​Working as a team, they bring back to the lab a core of permafrost, which they extract from the ground with special equipment. Then, they divide the core into different sections based on age. "We want to know how much carbon is in a meter of the core and how quickly it accumulated,” Jones said.​

​In one study, the team used a mass balance model and found that permafrost thaw turned peatlands into net carbon sources for decades following thaw. The peatlands eventually returned to being net carbon sinks on timescales of multiple centuries to millennia.   In another study, Jones, Waldrop, and Kristen Manies, an ecologist with USGS, studied permafrost in the Bonanza Creek Experimental Forest in Fairbanks, Alaska, and found that when permafrost formed after peat had accumulated, there was a smaller carbon loss than when permafrost and peat formed at the same time.  ​  “Understanding what happened at the site will help to more accurately predict how much carbon is lost under future climate change scenarios when permafrost thaws,” Jones said.

Miriam Jones holding a peat core that was extracted from a thawed permafrost bog at the Alaska Permafrost Experiment (APEX) site at Bonanza Creek LTER, Alaska. The boundary between the formerly frozen permafrost plateau and thawed bog is visible in the peat stratigraphy, with the light-colored peat indicated thawed bog.

​Researchers are also looking into impacts from abrupt permafrost thaw, which can happen when warm surface conditions meet permafrost with a high content of ice.

Although abrupt thaw covers a much smaller area than gradual thaw, it thaws a higher volume of ground at once, making its stored carbon likely to decompose and escape to the atmosphere. 

​ One study found that carbon released from a specific area with abrupt permafrost thaw (~2.5 million square kilometers) could provide a similar climate feedback as gradually thawing permafrost from an area that’s 18 million square kilometers. “We are seeing more frequent instances of abrupt thaw now and expect to see that trend continue in the future,” Jones said.  

  In addition to examining the landscape, researchers are also studying what’s happening on a molecular level. For example. Waldrop and others are also looking at DNA stored in permafrost soil. “We can use microbes to see what kind of plant communities existed in Alaska over tens of thousands of years,” Waldrop said.  

​ There’s also evidence that there are microbes active within the frozen permafrost. “There’s still a lot of liquid water in frozen soils, especially as it warms right before thaw” Waldrop said. These microbes are chewing up the carbon-rich organic matter found within the permafrost soils and releasing carbon to the atmosphere, sometimes in the form of methane.  

“The discovery that microbes are active in frozen soils is important because it means that they have been able to transform the chemistry of carbon within the permafrost, which in turn can affect how fast carbon is released to the atmosphere once it thaws,” Waldrop said. 

Waldrop studied when microbe activity and subsequent methane emissions would be highest during permafrost thaw, finding that the highest rates happened soon after thaw and declined over decades.

Permafrost thaw will force more carbon into the atmosphere. Eventually, that carbon will be recaptured and potentially frozen, if the conditions are right, but that reversal will take centuries to millennia. “The timescale does not align with what is necessary for climate mitigation,” Jones said. That means for the immediate future, permafrost thaw will be more of a carbon source than sink. 

​

A forest tower after a storm at the Alaska Peatland Experiment, a permafrost thaw research site. The tower helps researchers understand the ecosystem’s carbon balance.

Working across agencies on a common goal
USGS scientists continue to closely work with experts from 15 other federal agencies as members of the Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee to enhance both the scientific monitoring of and research on local, regional, and global environmental issues in the Arctic.  

As part of the 2022-2026 plan, the USGS was tasked to advance our understanding of processes controlling permafrost dynamics and their impacts on ecosystems, infrastructure, and climate feedbacks, among other topics. “Arctic communities are feeling the effects of multiple challenges,” the plan states. It emphasizes unprecedented warming from climate change and thawing permafrost. 

Alaska is filled with amazing, wide-open spaces,” Waldrop said. “But if permafrost continues to thaw on an accelerated timeline, those spaces could dramatically change.” 
​

You can be realistic as well as positive ​OUTSWIMMING THE SHARKS HARVEY MACKAY Harvey MacKay ​A small boy auditioned with his classmates for a school play. His mother knew his heart was set on being in the play — just like all the other children hoped — and she feared how he would react if he was not chosen.

On the day the parts were awarded, the little boy’s mother went to the school gates to collect her son. The boy rushed up to her, eyes shining with pride and excitement.

“Guess what, Mom?” he shouted, and then said some words that provide a lesson to us all: “I’ve been chosen to clap and cheer.”

Not everyone gets to play the part they want, but a positive attitude like this fellow’s goes a long way.

I am an eternal optimist.
I firmly believe that there is hardly anything we can’t do if we set our minds to it.

But it also helps to be realistic: I know I am never going to pitch in the World Series, but I can be a player/manager of a top-notch company.

The mind can convince competent people that they are incompetent, or conversely that merely adequate performers are highly talented. Unfortunately, self-doubt and negative attitudes seem to have a more powerful influence on the mind than positive attitudes.

Fight it. I have never met a successful pessimist. Here are some ideas on how.

Savor pleasure.
We are good about experiencing pleasure at special events like parties, but try to focus your attention on pleasant daily things as they occur. Celebrate the little things.

Practice gratitude.
It’s so easy to say thank you, and it can have such a powerful impact. Gratitude should be a continuous attitude.
Have you told the people around you how grateful you are for their roles in your life? You might be surprised at how they respond — perhaps because no one has ever told them they’ve made a difference.

Emphasize the positive.
Attitudes are contagious, and you will be a welcome carrier of this condition. A Harvard Special Health Report published in Positive Psychology found that older people tend to minimize the negative, accept their limitations and use their experience to compensate. The earlier in life that people adopt these practices, the better they sustain a positive attitude.

Surround yourself with positive people.
Negativity makes a person look at the land of milk and honey and see only calories and cholesterol. Also listen to other ideas and give others credit.

Focus on what you get to do.
As the song says, “You can’t always get what you want,” but usually you can get some satisfaction. Focus on small victories as well as major ones.

Practice handling rejection.
If there is anything that can get you down, it’s being constantly rejected. Rejection is a fact of life. It’s going to happen. Don’t take it personally. Learn from it, but don’t wallow in it. Rejection doesn’t have to be permanent.

It’s like the old farmer who was celebrating his 90th birthday.
He had seen it all — the Dust Bowl, years of flooding rains and scorching heat, banks taking back mortgages on every farm in the county. But through it all, he had remained positive and determined, even downright cheerful.

His family and friends pressed him for his secret.

“It ain’t so hard,” he said with a twinkle in his eye. “I just learned early on to cooperate with the inevitable.”

Mackay’s Moral:
Our minds are like a garden; each day you need to weed out the negativity and feed it positively.
​
Harvey Mackay is a Minneapolis businessman. Contact him at 612-378- 6202 or email harvey@mackay.com.

TRUMP SETS SIGHTS ON BREAKING NEW NORMS Story by SHANE GOLDMACHER, JONATHAN SWAN, MAGGIE HABERMAN and STEPHANIE LAI • New York Times • Photo by WILL LANZONI • CNN Former president Donald Trump and CNN's Kaitlan Collins faced off at a town-hall event in Manchester, N.H.

In little over an hour, Donald Trump suggested the United States should default on its debts for the first time in history, injected doubt over the country's commitment to defending Ukraine from Russia's invasion, dangled pardons for most of the Capitol rioters convicted of crimes and refused to say he would abide by the results of the next presidential election.

The second-term vision Trump sketched out at a CNN town hall event Wednesday would represent a sharp departure from core American values that have been at the bedrock of the nation for decades: its creditworthiness, its credibility with international allies and its adherence to the rule of law at home.

Trump's provocations were hardly shocking. His time in office was often defined by a rules-don't-apply-to-me approach to governance and a lack of interest in upholding the post-World War II national security order, and at 76 he is not bound to change much.

But his performance nonetheless signaled an escalation of his bid to bend the government to his wishes as he runs again for the White House, only this time with a greater command of the Republican Party's pressure points and a plan to demolish the federal bureaucracy.

The televised event crystallized that the version of Trump who could return to office in 2025 — vowing to be a vehicle of "retribution" — is likely to govern as he did in 2020. In that final year of his presidency, Trump cleared out people perceived as disloyal and promoted those who would fully indulge his instincts — things he did not always do during the first three years of his administration, when his establishmentarian advisers often talked him out of drastic policy changes.

"From my perspective, there was an evolution of Donald Trump over his four years, with 2020 I think being the most dramatic example of him — the real him," said Mark Esper, who served as Trump's defense secretary. "And I suspect that would be his starting point if he were to win office in 2024."

In a statement, Jason Miller, a senior adviser to Trump, dismissed criticisms of the former president, who he said "spoke directly to Americans suffering from the Biden decline and President Trump's desire to bring about security and economic prosperity on Day 1."
He added, "Understandably, this vision is not shared by the failed warmongers, political losers and career bureaucratic hacks — many of whom he fired or defeated — who have created all of America's problems."

At the town hall event, Trump almost cavalierly floated ideas that would reshape the nation's standing in the world, vowing to end the Ukraine war within 24 hours and declining to commit to supporting the country, a U.S. ally that has relied on billions of dollars in aid to hold off the Russian onslaught.

"Do you want Ukraine to win this war?" CNN's Kaitlan Collins pressed.

Trump evaded. "I don't think in terms of winning and losing," he replied, adding that he was focused on winding down the war. "I think in terms of getting it settled so we stop killing all these people." He did not mention that the majority of the killing has been committed by Russia.

Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., who sits on the Foreign Relations Committee and is close to President Joe Biden, said there were fears internationally of Trump's return.

"His performance last night just reinforced what so many of our allies and partners have told me concerns them over the past two years — that a return of Trump to the White House would be a return to the chaos," he said.

Some GOP elected officials who are skeptical of U.S. aid to Ukraine praised Trump's performance. Sen. J.D. Vance of Ohio called his Ukraine answer "real statesmanship." Miller argued that Trump had an "entire term with no new wars, and he's ready to do it again."
In New Hampshire, the audience of Republicans lapped up Trump's one-liners and slew of insults — to Collins (a "nasty person," he jeered, echoing his old attack on Hillary Clinton), to former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, to E. Jean Carroll, the woman whom a jury this past week found Trump liable of sexually abusing and defaming. And the crowd expressed no dissent as he again tried to rewrite the history of Jan. 6, 2021, when his supporters stormed the Capitol in an attempt to overturn his election loss. "It was a beautiful day," Trump said.

If he becomes president again, he said, he would "most likely" pardon "a large portion" of his supporters who were convicted over their actions on Jan. 6. "They were there with love in their heart," he said of the crowd, which he beamed had been the "largest" of his career.

"You see what you're going to get, which is a presidency untethered to the truth and untethered to the constitutional order," said Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, the Republican Party's most prominent Trump critic remaining on Capitol Hill. "The idea that people who've been convicted of crimes are all going to be pardoned, or for the most part pardoned, is quite a departure from the principles of the Constitution and of our party."

Trump also embraced the possibility of defaulting in the debt ceiling standoff between Biden and congressional Republicans, an act that economists say could spell catastrophe for the global economy. "You might as well do it now because you'll do it later, because we have to save this country," Trump said. "Our country is dying."

Former Gov. Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas, a Republican who is running a long-shot campaign for president in 2024, said Trump's potential return to the White House posed an "enormous" risk for the nation. "He has shown such a disrespect for our institutions of government that are critical to our democracy," Hutchinson said, adding that he had been particularly unnerved by the talk of defaulting.

Despite such warnings from old-guard Republicans, the cheers from the conservative crowd in New Hampshire were an audible reminder of Trump's sizable lead in GOP primary polls. Karl Rove, the architect of George W. Bush's two presidential victories, said in an interview that "for true believers and ardent supporters, it was a boffo performance" by Trump. But he said that other Republicans would now be forced to answer for "a big pile of noxious material on their doorsteps."

One of the most controversial policies of Trump's presidency was the forced separation of migrant parents from their children at the southern border, which Trump reversed himself on in June 2018 after a huge backlash.

But during the town hall Wednesday, Trump suggested he would revive it. "Well, when you have that policy, people don't come," he said.
"If a family hears they're going to be separated, they love their family, they don't come."

Casual observers might be inclined, as some did in 2016, to take Trump's most extreme statements, such as his casual embrace of allowing the nation to default, seriously but not literally.
Pressed by Collins, Trump would not say he was willing to accept the 2024 results.

Trump also denounced former Vice President Mike Pence for upholding the 2020 results and waved off the suggestion that Pence had been at risk on Jan. 6, even though the Secret Service tried to evacuate him from the Capitol.

"I don't think he was in any danger," Trump said.

Marc Short, who was with Pence that day as his chief of staff, called out Trump's double standard in defending violence by his supporters while claiming to broadly stand for law and order.

"Many of us called for the prosecution of BLM rioters when they destroyed private businesses," Short said, referring to Black Lives Matter supporters. "It's hard to see how there's a different threshold when rioters injure law enforcement, threaten public officials and loot the Capitol."

​ Everything You Need to Know About the Debt Ceiling Congress controls how much money the United States can borrow. Here’s a look at why that is and what it means. By Alan Rappeport Reporting from Washington May 2, 2023 U.S Rep. Dean Phillips

Washington is heading for another big fight over whether to raise or suspend the nation’s debt limit, which caps the amount of money the federal government can borrow to pay its bills. This year is shaping up to be the messiest fight in at least a decade. Republicans are demanding that an increase in the borrowing limit be accompanied by spending cuts and other cost savings. President Biden has said he will oppose any attempt to tie spending cuts to raising the debt ceiling, increasing the likelihood of a protracted standoff. The president is set to meet with Republican and Democratic leaders at the White House on May 9 to discuss a path forward. But it is still unclear how quickly lawmakers will act to raise the nation’s borrowing cap. Here is what you need to know about the debt limit and what happens if no deal can be reached:

What is the debt limit?
The debt limit is a cap on the total amount of money that the United States is authorized to borrow to fund the government and meet its financial obligations. Because the federal government runs budget deficits — meaning it spends more than it brings in through taxes and other revenue — it must borrow huge sums of money to pay its bills. Those obligations include funding for social safety net programs, interest on the national debt and salaries for members of the armed forces.  Approaching the debt ceiling often elicits calls by lawmakers to cut back on government spending. But lifting the debt limit does not actually authorize any new spending — in fact, it simply allows the United States to spend money on programs that have already been authorized by Congress.

When was the debt limit reached?
The United States officially hit its debt limit on Jan. 19, prompting the Treasury Department to use accounting maneuvers known as extraordinary measures to continue paying the government’s obligations and avoid a default. Those measures temporarily curb certain government investments so that the bills can continue to be paid. The ability to use those measures to delay a default could be exhausted by June. Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen on Monday warned lawmakers that the United States could run out of cash by June 1 if the borrowing cap isn’t raised or suspended.

How much debt does the United States have?
The national debt crossed $31 trillion for the first time last year. The borrowing cap is set at $31.381 trillion.

Why does the United States have a debt limit?
According to the Constitution, Congress must authorize government borrowing. In the early 20th century, the debt limit was instituted so that the Treasury would not need to ask Congress for permission each time it had to issue debt to pay bills. During World War I, Congress passed the Second Liberty Bond Act of 1917 to give the Treasury more flexibility to issue debt and manage federal finances. The debt limit started to take its current shape in 1939, when Congress consolidated different limits that had been set on different types of bonds into a single borrowing cap. At the time, the limit was set to $45 billion. While the debt limit was created to make government run more smoothly, many policymakers believe that it has become more trouble than it’s worth. In 2021, Ms. Yellen said she supported abolishing the debt limit.

What happens if the debt limit is not raised or suspended?
If the government exhausts its extraordinary measures and runs out of cash, it would be unable to issue new debt. That means it would not have enough money to pay its bills, including interest and other payments it owes to bondholders, military salaries and benefits to retirees. No one knows exactly what would happen if the United States gets to that point, but the government could default on its debt if it is unable to make required payments to its bondholders. Economists and Wall Street analysts warn that such a scenario would be economically devastating, and could plunge the entire world into a financial crisis.

Will military salaries, Social Security benefits and bondholders be paid?
Various ideas have been raised to ensure that critical payments are not missed — particularly payments to the investors who hold U.S. debt. But none of these ideas have ever been tried, and it remains unclear whether the government could actually continue paying any of its bills if it can’t borrow more money. One idea that has been proposed is that the Treasury Department would prioritize certain payments to avoid defaulting on U.S. debt. In that case, the Treasury would first pay the bondholders who own U.S. Treasury debt, even if it delayed other financial obligations like government salaries or retirement benefits. So far, the Treasury seems to have ruled that out as an option. Ms. Yellen has said that such an approach would not avoid a debt “default” in the eyes of markets. ​“Treasury systems have all been built to pay all of our bills when they’re due and on time, and not to prioritize one form of spending over another,” Ms. Yellen told reporters earlier this year.

Alan Rappeport is an economic policy reporter, based in Washington. He covers the Treasury Department and writes about taxes, trade and fiscal matters. He previously worked for The Financial Times and The Economist. @arappeport

​Quarrel over baby leads to five shot dead in Texas Slaying is another act of retaliatory gun violence. By JUSTINE McDANIEL, ANDREA SALCEDO and MARK BERMAN • Washington Post At left a loved one was consoledas he arrived at the scene where five people were shot and killed Froday night.

A man killed five people, including an 8-year-old boy, with an AR-15-style weapon Friday night in an angry response to his neighbors' request that he stop shooting in his yard while their baby was trying to sleep, Texas authorities said Saturday.

Instead of heeding the request, the man allegedly took the gun, went to the neighbor's house, and killed half the people inside. He fled, sparking an overnight search around Cleveland, Texas, continuing Saturday night.

The mass killing of a family in their home was the latest act of retaliatory gun violence to traumatize an American community. The shooting renewed calls from gun control advocates for a federal ban on assault weapons, which have a unique ability to destroy the human body. It was at least the seventh incident this month in which an armed American shot people. Law enforcement officers went to the home after receiving a report of "harassment" around 11:30 p.m., Capers told reporters. They found the four adults dead and took the 8-year-old to the hospital.

The three surviving children also were taken to a hospital, Capers said, but they were not injured.

The victims had moved to Cleveland from Harris County. Cleveland is about 40 miles northeast of downtown Houston.

Capers said they lived in a "regular country neighborhood" known as Trails End; all victims were from Honduras.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott had not publicly responded to the news of the shooting by late Saturday afternoon.

Balderas, who has lived in the neighborhood for three years, described the family as happy. They moved in about two years ago, she said. She said the children's father, an electrician, helped her around the house, and the family aided Balderas when her father died.

"They were a very happy family. Christian. They were kind," she said. "They would never say no to us. They were always helping us. ... They were always there."

Balderas said she stayed up until 5 a.m. in fear because the gunman had not been apprehended. "It hurts a lot because I did love the family a lot. I am now afraid to be at home."

This was the year's 19th U.S. shooting to kill at least four people, not including the shooter, according to the Gun Violence Archive, which tracks U.S. shootings.

The killings drew calls from gun control advocates for a federal ban on AR-15-style weapons, whose sale is banned in a few states. Washington became the latest state on Wednesday when its Democratic governor signed a ban.

President Joe Biden urged Congress to pass a federal assault weapons ban after a shooter killed six people with an AR-15-style weapon at a Nashville school last month.

Republicans in Congress have dismissed the legislation.

After the shooting, Kris Brown, president of the Brady gun control organization, said AR-15s "have no place in civilian life."

"These weapons of war were designed to kill as many people as quickly as possible, which is why they are the weapon of choice for America's mass shooters — and why Congress must ban them immediately," Brown said.

Texas has some of the least restrictive gun laws in the country, according to the nonprofit Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which supports stricter regular, everyday interactions.
The family in Texas had lived in their neighborhood for about two years.

Their neighbor, Francisco Oropeza, 38, was charged with five counts of murder, San Jacinto County Sheriff Greg Capers said. Authorities said they believed he was about 2 miles from the area Saturday afternoon and were working to apprehend him, he said.

Ten people, all family members, were in the home during the shooting. Five survived, including three children.

The Sheriff's Office said that three women and a man were killed, along with an 8-year-old boy who died later at a hospital.

Two of the women killed were found lying on top of the surviving young children in a bedroom, "trying to protect them," Capers said by phone from the scene.

All five victims were shot in the head, Capers said. "It's horrific. No one should ever have to look at this scene, the blood, the trauma that went on in that house."

Authorities initially searched for Oropeza in a wooded area near the neighborhood.

Later, the FBI said the suspect could be within a 10- to 20-square-mile radius.

Oropeza frequently shot his AR-15-style weapon in his yard, Capers said and was doing so Friday when his neighbors asked him to stop about 11 p.m. He allegedly became angry after they said their baby was trying to sleep and, after the conversation, went to their home. Authorities say video footage of Oropeza walking to the victims' front door before entering.

"The neighbors walked over and said ... 'Hey man, can you not do that? We've got an infant in here trying to sleep," Capers said. "They went back in their house, and then we have a video of him walking up their driveway with his AR-15."

Vianey Balderas, who lives across the street, said she first heard gunshots that night when a few people were outside.

About 20 minutes later, Balderas heard about five more gunshots, then another 10. "When I heard those gunshots, I didn't think anything of it because, in this neighborhood, everyone has guns. So every weekend you hear gunshots," she said in an interview in Spanish.

"People shoot in their backyards after they drink alcohol, men take out guns at house parties and shoot the ground."

Minutes later, Balderas, 27, heard a truck pulling away. She then saw one of her neighbors — the children's father, she said — outside, begging someone to call an ambulance.

She said the family and Oropeza had quarreled before.

Arms Laws
Texas gun rights advocates, meanwhile, said the shooting did not highlight any problems with the state's firearm-friendly policies.

"It's a tragedy, but we need to get away from blaming guns, which only answers the question of how and start asking the question why these shootings take place, why people feel the need to settle differences with violence and murder," said C.J. Grisham, legal and policy director for Texas Gun Rights, a Second Amendment advocacy group.

Grisham said the gunman's AR-15-style gun was "meaningless" because "he could have killed those people just as easily with a handgun."

The killings add to a growing list of recent shootings by armed Americans who have fired in response to what could have been regular, everyday interactions.

This month, an Illinois man was fatally shot by a neighbor angry about his leaf blower; a 20-year-old woman was shot and killed by a New York homeowner after accidentally pulling into the wrong driveway; a neighbor in North Carolina shot a 6-year-old and her father after the child's basketball rolled into his yard.
​
​

GOP amps up efforts to limit voter participation College campuses, mail-in voting among the targets. By JOSH DAWSEY and AMY GARDNER • Washington Post NASHVILLE Cleta Mitchell GOP lawyer and fundraiser, outlined steps to curtail voter access during a retreat last weekend - Matt Rourke - Associated Press

​A top Republican legal strategist told a roomful of GOP donors last weekend that conservatives must band together to limit voting on college campuses, same-day voter registration and automatic mailing of ballots to registered voters, according to a copy of her presentation reviewed by the Washington Post.

Cleta Mitchell, a longtime GOP lawyer and fundraiser who worked closely with former President Donald Trump to try to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, gave the presentation at a Republican National Committee donor retreat in Nashville on April 15 .

The presentation offered a window into a strategy that seems designed to reduce voter access and turnout among certain groups, including students and those who vote by mail, both of which tend to skew Democratic.

Mitchell did not respond to a request for comment, and it is unclear whether she delivered the presentation exactly as it was prepared on her PowerPoint slides. But in addition to the presentation, the Post listened to audio of portions of the presentation obtained by liberal journalist Lauren Windsor in which Mitchell discussed limiting campus and early voting.

"What are these college campus locations?" she asked, according to the audio. "What is this young people effort that they do? They basically put the polling place next to the student dorm so they just have to roll out of bed, vote, and go back to bed."

The GOP has not formally endorsed Mitchell's plan but has worked closely with her since Trump left office. The presentation made clear that at least some key figures within the party remain intent on tightening rules for voting and elections. The persistence of the message as the 2024 vote approaches comes despite the fact that candidates who emphasized Trump's stolen election narrative were repudiated in many key statewide races in the 2022 midterms.
After the presentation, Mitchell was seen at the Four Seasons hotel bar, meeting with donors and Republican strategists.

"As the RNC continues to strengthen our Election Integrity program, we are thankful for leaders like Cleta Mitchell who do important work for the Republican ecosystem. Our guests in Nashville were grateful for her to travel to the event and share her efforts," said Keith Schipper, an RNC spokesman.

Mitchell told her RNC audience that her organization, the Election Integrity Network, "is NOT about winning campaigns," according to the text of the presentation.

But the slides gave little other rationale for why campus or mail voting should be curtailed. At another point in the presentation, she said the nation's electoral systems must be saved "for any candidate other than a leftist to have a chance to WIN in 2024."

Republicans have claimed that lax ID requirements — such as allowing college identification or mail voting where no ID is required — open the door for voter fraud. But they have produced no evidence of widespread fraud — and experts say that's because it doesn't happen.

At one point in the presentation, Mitchell said she is optimistic that the Virginia Senate will flip to Republican control this year, allowing for the elimination of early voting in the state, according to the audio reviewed by the Post.

"Forty-five days!" she said in a reference to Virginia's early voting period. "Do you know how hard it is to have observers be able to watch for that long a period?"

Some advisers to other elected officials were frustrated the RNC allowed her to speak at a major event, given her role on behalf of Trump after the election and her repeated false claims about voter fraud. But they did not want to criticize her publicly.  RNC officials noted that other speakers who were critical of Trump were also given prime billing at the event.

In Trump's private comments to donors at the event, he said that he eventually wants to end all mail and early voting, according to audio obtained by the Post. But until that happens, he said, Republicans have to get better at it.

Mitchell advised Trump and was on the call between Trump and Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger in January 2021 when Trump asked Raffensperger to "find" enough votes to overturn the result.

"All we have to do, Cleta, is find 11,000-plus votes," Trump said on the call, which is now under investigation by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis as part of a broader inquiry into efforts to overturn the 2020 result in Georgia.

Mitchell has long been a prominent Republican lawyer who has worked for a range of causes, candidates and committees, including the National Rifle Association, former EPA administrator Scott Pruitt and the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

Mitchell was a partner in the firm Foley and Lardner but resigned a day after the Raffensperger call, following a statement from the firm criticizing her participation in the call and her involvement with Trump.

After her resignation, Mitchell defended her involvement with Trump's efforts in a letter to family and friends. "Those who deny the existence of voter and election fraud are not in touch with facts and reality," she wrote.

Mitchell soon founded the Election Integrity Network and has recruited volunteers and held regular calls with officials across the country in a bid to "develop and share research and information, develop policy proposals and create legal strategies," according to the group's website.

Campus voting has been a contentious issue for years, with Republicans in states including New Hampshire, Idaho and Texas seeking to curtail the use of college identification cards to vote.

Supporters of these measures have said they want to prevent out-of-state students from voting in their states and also prevent the use of identification that does not include a home address.

In her presentation in Nashville, Mitchell focused on campus voting in five states — Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, Virginia and Wisconsin — all of which are home to enormous public universities with large in-state student populations.

Mitchell also targeted the preregistration of students, an apparent reference to the practice in some states of allowing 17-year-olds to register ahead of their 18th birthdays so they can vote as soon as they are eligible.

Marc Elias, a Democratic election lawyer who has sued Republicans over their efforts to tighten student and youth voting laws, said Mitchell's efforts appear aimed at making it harder for young people, who tend to vote Democratic, to cast their ballots.

"Imagine if in every place in this presentation where she references campuses, she talked about African Americans," Elias said. "Or every place she says students, she instead talked about Latinos. There is a subtle but real bigotry that goes on when people target young voters because of their age."

Elias is leading a suit in Idaho seeking to block a new law that removes student IDs from the list of permissible identification for voting. Idaho, which has a large instate student population, saw one of the largest increases of student-aged voter registration between 2018 and 2022 of any state, according to research from Tufts University.

"The point is they don't want their Idaho students voting in their state," Elias said.

The chief sponsor of the Idaho bill, Republican Rep. Tina Lambert, said on the floor of the statehouse in February that its purpose was to prevent the use of IDs that are issued without rigorous verification processes. She said the bill is not intended to block students from voting.

​What Are the Effects of Climate Change? A rapidly warming planet poses an existential threat to all life on earth. Just how bad it gets depends on how quickly we act. October 24, 2022 Courtney Lindwall Writer/Reporter Effects of Climate Change on Weather

As global temperatures climb, widespread shifts in weather systems occur, making events like droughts, hurricanes, and floods more intense and unpredictable. Extreme weather events that may have hit just once in our grandparents’ lifetimes are becoming more common in ours. However, not every place will experience the same effects: Climate change may cause severe drought in one region while making floods more likely in another.

​ Already, the planet has warmed 1.1 degrees Celsius (1.9 degrees Fahrenheit) since the preindustrial era began 250 years ago. And scientists warn it could reach a worst-case scenario of 4 degrees Celsius (7.2 degrees Fahrenheit) by 2100 if we fail to tackle the causes of climate change—namely, the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas).

Tokyo during a record-breaking heat wave, August 13, 2020

Higher average temperatures
This change in global average temperature—seemingly small but consequential and climbing—means that, each summer, we are likely to experience increasingly sweltering heat waves. Even local news meteorologists are starting to connect strings of record-breaking days to new long-term trends, which are especially problematic in regions where infrastructure and housing have not been built with intensifying heat in mind. And heat waves aren’t just uncomfortable—they’re the leading cause of weather-related fatalities in the United States.

Longer-lasting droughts
Hotter temperatures increase the rate at which water evaporates from the air, leading to more severe and pervasive droughts. Already, climate change has pushed the American West into a severe “megadrought”—the driest 22-year stretch recorded in at least 1,200 years—shrinking drinking water supplies, withering crops, and making forests more susceptible to insect infestations. Drought can also create a positive feedback loop in which drier soil and less plant cover cause even faster evaporation.

More intense wildfires
This drier, hotter climate also creates conditions that fuel more vicious wildfire seasons—with fires that spread faster and burn longer—putting millions of additional lives and homes at risk. The number of large wildfires doubled between 1984 and 2015 in the western United States. And in California alone, the annual area burned by wildfires increased 500 percent between 1972 and 2018.

Evacuation after Hurricane Harvey in Houston, August 28, 2017

Stronger storms
Warmer air also holds more moisture, making tropical cyclones wetter, stronger, and more capable of rapidly intensifying. In the latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), scientists found that daily rainfall during extreme precipitation events would increase by about 7 percent for each degree Celsius of global warming, increasing the dangers of flooding. The frequency of severe Category 4 and 5 hurricanes is also expected to increase. In 2017, Hurricane Harvey, a devastating Category 4 storm, dumped a record 275 trillion pounds of rain and resulted in dozens of deaths in the Houston area.

Effects of Climate Change on the Environment
From the poles to the tropics, climate change is disrupting ecosystems. Even a seemingly slight shift in temperature can cause dramatic changes that ripple through food webs and the environment.

The lake at Jökulsárlón, a glacial lagoon in Iceland, which has grown because of continued glacial melting

Melting sea ice
The effects of climate change are most apparent in the world’s coldest regions—the poles. The Arctic is heating up twice as fast as anywhere else on earth, leading to the rapid melting of glaciers and polar ice sheets, where a massive amount of water is stored. As sea ice melts, darker ocean waters that absorb more sunlight become exposed, creating a positive feedback loop that speeds up the melting process. In just 15 years, the Arctic could be entirely ice-free in the summer.

Sea level rise
Scientists predict that melting sea ice and glaciers, as well as the fact that warmer water expands in volume, could cause sea levels to rise as much as 3.61 feet by the end of the century, should we fail to curb emissions. The extent (and pace) of this change would devastate low-lying regions, including island nations and densely populated coastal cities like New York City and Mumbai.

But sea level rise at far lower levels is still costly, dangerous, and disruptive. Scientists predict that the United States will see a foot of sea level rise by 2050, which will regularly damage infrastructure, like roads, sewage treatment plants, and even power plants. Beaches that families have grown up visiting may be gone by the end of the century. Sea level rise also harms the environment, as encroaching seawater can both erode coastal ecosystems and invade freshwater inland aquifers, which we rely on for agriculture and drinking water. Saltwater incursion is already reshaping life in nations like Bangladesh, where one-quarter of the lands lie less than 7 feet above sea level.

A waterlogged road, caused by rainstorm and upstream flood discharge, in the Shaoguan, Guangdong Province of China, June 21, 2022

Flooding
In addition to coastal flooding caused by sea level rise, climate change influences the factors that result in inland and urban flooding: snowmelt and heavy rain. As global warming continues to both exacerbate sea level rise and extreme weather, our nation’s floodplains are expected to grow by approximately 45 percent by 2100. In 2022, deadly flooding in Pakistan—which inundated as much as a third of the country—resulted from torrential rains mixed with melting glaciers and snow.

Warmer ocean waters and marine heat waves
Oceans are taking the brunt of our climate crisis. Covering more than 70 percent of the planet’s surface, oceans absorb 93 percent of all the heat that’s trapped by greenhouse gases and up to 30 percent of all the carbon dioxide emitted from burning fossil fuels. Temperature-sensitive fish and other marine life are already changing migration patterns toward cooler and deeper waters to survive, sending food webs and important commercial fisheries into disarray. And the frequency of marine heat waves has increased by more than a third. These spikes have led to mass die-offs of plankton and marine mammals.

To make matters worse, the elevated absorption of carbon dioxide by the ocean leads to its gradual acidification, which alters the fundamental chemical makeup of the water and threatens marine life that has evolved to live in a narrow pH band. Animals like corals, oysters, and mussels will likely feel these effects first, as acidification disrupts the calcification process required to build their shells.

Ecosystem stressors
Land-based ecosystems—from old-growth forests to savannahs to tropical rainforests—are faring no better. Climate change is likely to increase outbreaks of pests, invasive species, and pathogen infections in forests. It’s changing the kinds of vegetation that can thrive in a given region and disrupting the life cycles of wildlife, all of which is changing the composition of ecosystems and making them less resilient to stressors. While ecosystems have the capacity to adapt, many are reaching the hard limits of that natural capacity. More repercussions will follow as temperatures rise.

Climate change appears to be triggering a series of cascading ecological changes that we can neither fully predict nor, once they have enough momentum, fully stop. This ecosystem destabilization may be most apparent when it comes to keystone species that have an outsize- role in holding up an ecosystem’s structure.

Coffee plants destroyed by frost due to extremely low temperatures near Caconde in the São Paulo state of Brazil, August 25, 2021

Effects of Climate Change on Agriculture

 Less predictable growing seasons
In a warming world, farming crops is more unpredictable—and livestock, which are sensitive to extreme weather, become harder to raise. Climate change shifts precipitation patterns, causing unpredictable floods and longer-lasting droughts. More frequent and severe hurricanes can devastate an entire season’s worth of crops. Meanwhile, the dynamics of pests, pathogens, and invasive species—all of which are costly for farmers to manage—are also expected to become harder to predict. This is bad news, given that most of the world’s farms are small and family-run. One bad drought or flood could decimate an entire season’s crop or herd. For example, in June 2022, a triple-digit heat wave in Kansas wiped out thousands of cows. While the regenerative agriculture movement is empowering rural communities to make their lands more resilient to climate change, unfortunately, not all communities can equitably access the support services that can help them embrace these more sustainable farming tactics.

Reduced soil health
Healthy soil has good moisture and mineral content and is teeming with bugs, bacteria, fungi, and microbes that in turn contribute to healthy crops. But climate change, particularly extreme heat and changes in precipitation, can degrade soil quality. These impacts are exacerbated in areas where industrial, chemical-dependent monoculture farming has made soil and crops less able to withstand environmental changes.

Food shortages
Ultimately, impacts to our agricultural systems pose a direct threat to the global food supply. And food shortages and price hikes driven by climate change will not affect everyone equally: Wealthier people will continue to have more options for accessing food, while potentially billions of others will be plummeted into food insecurity—adding to the billions that already have moderate or severe difficulty getting enough to eat.

The poison dart frog’s survival is currently threatened by habitat loss and climate change.

Effects of Climate Change on Animals
It’s about far more than just the polar bears: Half of all animal species in the world’s most biodiverse places, like the Amazon rainforest and the Galapagos Islands, are at risk of extinction from climate change. And climate change is threatening species that are already suffering from the biodiversity crisis, which is driven primarily by changes in land and ocean use (like converting wild places to farmland) and direct exploitation of species (like overfishing and wildlife trade). With species already in rough shape—more than 500,000 species have insufficient habitat for long-term survival—unchecked climate change is poised to push millions over the edge.

Climate change rapidly and fundamentally alters (or in some cases, destroys) the habitat that wildlife have incrementally adapted to over millennia. This is especially harmful for species’ habitats that are currently under threat from other causes. Ice-dependent mammals like walruses and penguins, for example, won’t fare well as ice sheets shrink. Rapid shifts in ocean temperatures stress the algae that nourishes coral reefs, causing reefs to starve—an increasingly common phenomenon known as coral bleaching. Disappearing wetlands in the Midwest’s Prairie Pothole Region means the loss of watering holes and breeding grounds for millions of migratory birds. (Many species are now struggling to survive, as more than 85 percent of wetlands have been lost since 1700). And sea level rise will inundate or erode away many coastal habitats, where hundreds of species of birds, invertebrates, and other marine species live.

Many species’ behaviors—mating, feeding, migration—are closely tied to subtle seasonal shifts, as in temperature, precipitation level, and foliage. In some cases, changes to the environment are happening quicker than species are able to adapt. When the types and quantity of plant life change across a region, or when certain species bloom or hatch earlier or later than in the past, it impacts food and water supplies and reverberates up food chains.

Wildfire smoke–filled air in Multnomah County, Oregon, September 16, 2020

Effects of Climate Change on Humans Ultimately, the way climate change impacts weather, the environment, animals, and agriculture affects humanity as well. But there’s more. Around the world, our ways of life—from how we get our food to the industries around which our economies are based—have all developed in the context of relatively stable climates. As global warming shakes this foundation, it promises to alter the very fabric of society. At worst, this could lead to widespread famine, disease, war, displacement, injury, and death. For many around the world, this grim forecast is already their reality. In this way, climate change poses an existential threat to all human life.

​Human health
Climate change worsens air quality. It increases exposure to hazardous wildfire smoke and ozone smog triggered by warmer conditions, both of which harm our health, particularly for those with pre-existing illnesses like asthma or heart disease. Insect-borne diseases like malaria and Zika become more prevalent in a warming world as their carriers are able to exist in more regions or thrive for longer seasons. In the past 30 years, the incidence of Lyme disease from ticks has nearly doubled in the United States. Thousands of people face injury, illness, and death every year from more frequent or more intense extreme weather events. At a 2-degree Celsius rise in global average temperature, an estimated one billion people will face heat stress risk. In the summer of 2022 alone, thousands died in record-shattering heat waves across Europe. Weeks later, dozens were killed by record-breaking urban flooding in the United States and Korea—and more than 1,500 people perished in the flooding in Pakistan, where resulting stagnant water and unsanitary conditions threaten even more.

The effects of climate change—and the looming threat of what’s yet to come—take a significant toll on mental health too. One recent study (the largest of its kind to date) surveyed 10,000 young people from 10 different countries. Forty-five percent of respondents said that their feelings about climate change, varying from anxiety to powerlessness to anger, impacted their daily lives.

A patient with dengue fever, a mosquito-borne disease, in Karachi, Pakistan, where the spread of diseases worsened due to flooding, September 2022

Worsening inequity
​The climate crisis exacerbates existing inequities. Though wealthy nations, such as the United States, have emitted the lion’s share of historical greenhouse gas emissions, it’s developing countries that may lack the resources to adapt and will now bear the brunt of the climate crisis. In some cases, low-lying island nations—like many in the Pacific—may cease to exist before developed economies make meaningful reductions to their carbon emissions.

Even within wealthier nations, disparities will continue to grow between those rich enough to shield themselves from the realities of climate change and those who cannot. Those with ample resources will not be displaced from their homes by wars over food or water—at least not right away. They will have homes with cool air during heat waves and be able to easily evacuate when a hurricane is headed their way. They will be able to buy increasingly expensive food and access treatment for respiratory illness caused by wildfire smoke. Billions of others can’t—and are paying the highest price for climate pollution they did not produce.

Hurricane Katrina, for example, displaced more than one million people around the Gulf Coast. But in New Orleans, where redlining practices promoted racial and economic segregation, the city’s more affluent areas tended to be located on higher ground—and those residents were able to return and rebuild much faster than others.

Displacement
Climate change will drive displacement due to impacts like food and water scarcities, sea level rise, and economic instability. It’s already happening. The United Nations Global Compact on Refugees recognizes that “climate, environmental degradation and disasters increasingly interact with the drivers of refugee movements.” Again, communities with the fewest resources—including those facing political instability and poverty—will feel the effects first and most devastatingly.

A flood-damaged home in Queens, New York, December 1, 2021

Economic impacts
According to the 2018 National Climate Assessment, unless action is taken, climate change will cost the U.S. economy as much as $500 billion per year by the end of the century. And that doesn’t even include its enormous impacts on human health. Entire local industries—from commercial fishing to tourism to husbandry—are at risk of collapsing, along with the economic support they provide.

Recovering from the destruction wrought by extreme weather like hurricanes, flash floods, and wildfires is also getting more expensive every year. In 2021, the price tag of weather disasters in the United States totaled $145 billion—the third-costliest year on record, including a number of billion-dollar weather events.

Future Effects of Climate Change 
The first wave of impacts can already be felt in our communities and seen on the nightly news. In the near future, between 2030 and 2050, climate change is expected to cause an additional 250,000 deaths per year from things like malnutrition, insect-borne diseases, and heat stress. And the World Bank estimates that climate change could displace more than 140 million people within their home countries in sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, and Latin America by 2050.

But the degree to which the climate crisis upends our lives depends on whether global leaders decide to chart a different course. If we fail to curb greenhouse gas emissions, scientists predict a catastrophic 4.3 degrees Celsius, (or around 8 degrees Fahrenheit) of warming by the end of the century. What would a world that warm look like? Wars over water. Crowded hospitals to contend with spreading disease. Collapsed fisheries. Dead coral reefs. Even more lethal heat waves. These are just some of the impacts predicted by climate scientists.

Solar panel installation at a floating photovoltaic plant on a lake in Haltern am See, Germany, April 2022

Climate mitigation, or our ability to reverse climate change and undo its widespread effects, hinges on the successful enactment of policies that yield deep cuts to carbon pollution, end our dependence on dangerous fossil fuels and the deadly air pollution they generate, and prioritize the people and ecosystems on the frontlines. And these actions must be taken quickly in order to ensure a healthier present day and future. In one of its latest reports, the IPCC presented its most optimistic emissions scenario, in which the world only briefly surpasses 1.5 degrees of warming but sequestration measures cause it to dip back below by 2100. Climate adaptation, a term that refers to coping with climate impacts, is no longer optional; it’s necessary, particularly for the world’s most vulnerable populations.

Importantly, climate action is not a binary pass-fail test. Every fraction of a degree of warming that we prevent will reduce human suffering and death, and keep more of the planet’s natural systems intact. The good news is that a wide range of solutions exist to sharply reduce emissions, slow the pace of warming, and protect communities on the frontlines of climate impacts. Climate leaders the world over—those on major political stages as well as grassroots community activists—are offering up alternative models to systems that prioritize polluters over people. Many of these solutions are rooted in ancestral and Indigenous understandings of the natural world and have existed for millennia. Some solutions require major investments into clean, renewable energy and sustainable technologies. To be successful, climate solutions must also address intersecting crises—like poverty, racism, and gender inequality—that compound and drive the causes and impacts of the climate crisis. A combination of human ingenuity and immense political will can help us get there.

This NRDC.org story is available for online republication by news media outlets or nonprofits under these conditions: The writer(s) must be credited with a byline; you must note prominently that the story was originally published by NRDC.org and link to the original; the story cannot be edited (beyond simple things such as grammar); you can’t resell the story in any form or grant republishing rights to other outlets; you can’t republish our material wholesale or automatically—you need to select stories individually; you can’t republish the photos or graphics on our site without specific permission; you should drop us a note to let us know when you’ve used one of our stories

​On Trump, looks like Georgia may go next By RICHARD FAUSSET and DANNY HAKIM ​New York Times

ATLANTA - The indictment of Donald Trump in New York over hush-money payments to a porn actress was a global spectacle, with the former president glumly returning to his old stomping grounds in Manhattan as TV networks closely tracked his procession of black SUVs on their way to the courthouse.

But strip away the high drama, and the actual charging document in the case was far less grand: 34 felony counts of a fairly narrow and common bookkeeping charge that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg described as the "bread and butter" of his office's white-collar criminal prosecutions.

In Georgia, however, there is another criminal investigation of Trump nearing completion, this one also led by a local prosecutor, Fani Willis of Fulton County. While nothing is certain, there are numerous signs that she may go big, with a more kaleidoscopic indictment charging not only Trump, but perhaps a dozen or more of his allies.

Her investigation has targeted a wide range of conduct centered around efforts to subvert the democratic process and overturn Trump's 2020 election loss. Nearly 20 people are already known to have been told that they are targets who could face charges, including Rudy Giuliani, Trump's former personal lawyer, and David Shafer, the head of the Georgia Republican Party.

For Trump, the possibility of a second and potentially more complex criminal indictment in another state underscores the blizzard of legal challenges he is facing, even as he emerges as the clear frontrunner among GOP presidential candidates.

For Willis, the choice to pursue a narrowly focused indictment or a more sprawling one — a classic prosecutor's dilemma — carries with it potential risks and benefits on both sides. And American history offers few examples in which the stakes are so high.

"Certainly, prosecutors would have this conversation of what's in the best interest of justice and what is strategically preferable for a case," said Barbara McQuade, a law professor at the University of Michigan and former federal prosecutor. A narrow case can be easier for jurors to understand.

But it is also possible to go "too narrow," McQuade said, denying a jury the ability to see the entire scope of a defendant's criminal behavior.
If, on the other hand, a wideranging scheme is charged, "you allow them to see the full scope of criminal conduct," she said. But going big could cause jurors to become lost amid a profusion of evidence, with a long trial increasing the possibility of a mistrial.

In Georgia, the investigation is focused on myriad efforts to overturn Trump's narrow loss in the state after his 2020 election defeat, including his January 2021 phone call to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, in which he pressed the state official and fellow Republican to recalculate the results and "find" him enough votes to win.

Trump is also under investigation by special counsel Jack Smith, appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland, for his role in the events leading up to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol and his decisions to retain sensitive government documents at his Florida home.

If Willis chooses to seek indictments in the Georgia case, she may do so after a new grand jury begins work in the second week of May, though nothing is set in stone. Typically, presenting such cases to a regular grand jury is a short process that takes a day or two.

The wide scope of the investigation has been evident for months, and Willis has said that seeking an indictment under the state's Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations, or RICO, statute is an option that she is considering.

Like the similar federal law, the Georgia RICO statute allows prosecutors to bundle what may seem to be unrelated crimes committed by different people if those crimes are perceived to be in support of a common objective.

Willis has extensive experience with racketeering cases, including a case she won involving a group of public school educators accused of altering students' standardized tests. Her office is currently pursuing racketeering charges against two gangs connected to the hip-hop world, including one led by Atlanta rapper Jeffery Williams, who performs as Young Thug.
​

WHAT TO KNOW ABOUT EYEDROP RECALLS By AMANDA HOLPUCH New York Times The bacteria Pseudomonas aeruginosa, shown via a scanning electron microscope, is linked to recent eyedrop recalls. Thje strain is especially worrisome because it is drug-resistant.

​
Two brands of eyedrops were pulled from shelves in January and February after they were linked to a drug resistant bacteria strain that has caused at least three deaths and eight cases of people losing their vision . Weeks later, two other types of eyedrops were recalled because they posed a different kind of contamination risk.

This flurry of recalls may have you second-guessing use of eyedrops , but there are significant differences among the recalls and steps you can take to stay safe.

"I would encourage all people out there who take eyedrops to continue using them, of course making sure that they're not using any of these that are recalled," said Dr. Christopher Starr, a clinical spokesperson for the American Academy of Ophthalmology.

Here's what to know about these recalls.

What eyedrops are recalled?
In January, the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration warned people to stop using EzriCare Artificial Tears and Delsam Pharma's Artificial Tears after the eyedrops were linked to a drug-resistant strain of the bacteria Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Global Pharma Healthcare in India, which makes Ezri- Care and Delsam Pharma's eyedrops, recalled both products in February.

Last month , a Florida woman sued Global Pharma, claiming that an infection caused by the eyedrops was so severe that doctors had to surgically remove one of her eyes.

The FDA has also warned people to stop using an eye ointment manufactured by Global Pharma because of possible contamination.
The two other eyedrop recalls were not linked to the bacteria outbreak.

On March 1, Apotex recalled prescription eyedrops used to reduce eye pressure in people with glaucoma or ocular hypertension. The company recalled six lots of Brimonidine Tartrate Ophthalmic Solution 0.15% because at least four bottle caps developed cracks, which could affect the product's sterility.

On March 3, Pharmedica recalled two lots of Purely Soothing 15% MSM Drops because they were not sterile.

These drops are used to treat eye irritation and swelling.

The CDC said that as of last week, the drug-resistant bacteria strain linked to the recalled EzriCare and Delsam eyedrops had been found in 68 people in 16 states.

To find out if you have eyedrops that were included in the recall, go to fda.gov/safety/ recalls.

See a doctor for symptoms
People who have used these artificial tears and who have symptoms of an eye infection should see a doctor immediately, the CDC said. The symptoms can include yellow, green or clear discharge from the eye, redness of the eye or eyelid, increased sensitivity to lights and eye pain or discomfort.

Eyedrops are generally safe
Barbara Tylka, an optometrist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, said that in general, eyedrops are safe to use and that many people need them to treat conditions such as dryness or irritation. About 117 million Americans used eyedrops and eyewash in 2020, according to Statista, a market research firm.

To use eyedrops safely, Tylka said people should use their own bottle and make sure it has not expired. People who have had eyedrops prescribed to them for a procedure such as cataract surgery should stop using those products once the healing process is over, she said.

To safely apply eyedrops, she said, people should use their nondominant hand to "gently tug on the lower eyelid, look up slightly," and then, with the dominant hand, put "that little drop in that lower cul-de-sac in the eyelid area."

Starr, an associate professor of ophthalmology at Weill Cornell Medicine, said patients should not press the bottle tip into the inner corner of the eye, which can contaminate the drops and scratch the surface of the eye. He said that when he accidentally hits his eyelid or eyelashes with the bottle tip, he considers the bottle contaminated and either resterilizes it or replaces it.
​
Starr and Tylka both emphasized that although the recalls were worrying, eyedrops are generally safe.

​Deposit insurance can buffer bank woes CHRIS FARRELL ​Feeling a queasy sense of déjà vu with the current bank turmoil? The reverberations from troubles at Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank, Credit Suisse, and others bring back bad memories of the failures, rescues, and bad economic times from 15 years ago.

There are sound reasons to believe the economic damage will be better contained this time around (fingers crossed).

Should we do more on our own to monitor the financial health of our bank or credit union before trouble erupts? “Some consumers want to dig deeper in the financials of their bank to avoid frozen deposits or other inconveniences,” writes John in an email. He wanted to know “how consumers can do their own due diligence beyond whether their deposits are FDIC insured.”

Even though banks publish a lot of numbers, the reality is their financial health is difficult for outsiders to understand.

Among the reasons listed at a Wharton School conference years ago include that banks “are credit-sensitive, they are opaque institutions, they hold illiquid instruments and they are vulnerable to sudden regime shifts.”

That’s the beauty of deposit insurance. You don’t have to understand the financials. All you need to know are the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. rules or, if your financial institution is a credit union, the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund. (FDIC and NCUA coverage are essentially the same.) Briefly, balances up to $250,000 per person per institution are protected depending on account ownership.

However, it isn’t hard to increase that coverage. For example, a couple could open a joint account. They are eligible for $500,000 protection on the joint bank account ($250,000 per owner) and $250,000 for each of their individual accounts at the same bank. The classic way to add coverage is to have accounts at different banks under the $250,000 limit.

Not many of us have to worry about breaching the $250,000 limit anyway.

You should still make judgments about where you bank.

I pulled my money from a too-big-to-fail bank marred by a series of scandals and deposited it into a local bank that focuses on small-business lending. (My main bank is an online bank.) I am well (and I mean well) under the insurance limits. I also think it’s prudent to deposit money at more than one insured institution.

Your money is safe, but if the FDIC does take over your bank there might be a wait before you can gain access to the account.
​
Chris Farrell is economics contributor to the Star Tribune, Minnesota Public Radio and American Public Media’s “Marketplace.”