What’s News In This Story?
–Palm Beach Post reporter Lulu Ramadan was denied entry to a polling place in Boca Raton after she tried to access it to talk to voters leaving the site.
–According to a series of Tweets, Ramadan was asked to show ID when she attempted to reach the polling place located inside the Woodfield Country Club in Boca Raton.
I’m at Woodfield Country Club in Boca Raton where there’s a polling place for inside the gated community (for a precinct with 2,217 registered voters). I was denied access to the polls as a journalist looking to check in on potential issues/talk to voters. #ElectionDay pic.twitter.com/SF4Bz3XTtm
— Lulu Ramadan (@luluramadan) November 6, 2018
–The gate is closed and not open to the public. When she showed her press badge, she was turned away because she is not a voter at the precinct.
–This seems to be a violation of election law as Sun-Sentinel reporter Dan Sweeney pointed out:
Lulu, it’s state law, section 101.71. “There shall be in each precinct in each county one polling place which shall be accessible to the public on election day and is managed by a board of inspectors and clerk of election.” They are violating state election law. Period.
— Dan Sweeney (@Daniel_Sweeney) November 6, 2018
–RISE NEWS called the Homeowners Association at Woodfield Country Club (the entity overseeing the polling place) and was told by the property manager that they had made a “mistake” in denying Ramadan.
–”We just got a call from the Supervisor of Elections telling us we made a faux pas,” Joan Burres, the property manager said. “Sorry that happened.”
–Burres said that the HOA had been traditionally informed that media was not allowed on the grounds of the country club. She also said that they didn’t realize that the site became “public” when it was being used as a polling location.
–Ramadan reports that the site is one of the biggest precincts in Palm Beach County with 2,217 registered voters.
—Here’s Something Completely Different: —
RISE NEWS is South Florida’s digital TV news network. Sign up for our awesome email newsletter to make sure you never miss a story!
Have a news tip about this topic or something completely different? Send it to firstname.lastname@example.org
What Do You Think?
About the AuthorRich Robinson is the CEO and publisher of Rise News. He is also a journalist and a native of Miami. Robinson graduated from the University of Alabama and can be followed on Twitter @RichRobMiami.
You Might also like
By Kyle Jones
Earlier this month, the photograph of 3-year-old Aylan Kurdi, who drowned trying to flee to Greece with his brother and mother, horrified the world and focused its attention on the ongoing refugee crisis in Syria and throughout the Middle East.
Since the Syrian Civil War started nearly five years ago, more than 210,000 Syrians have been killed, and an estimated 10 million Syrians have been displaced inside the country or in camps in neighboring countries. As the Syrian Refugee crisis worsens and now spreads to Europe, many now question what the responsibility of the western world is in helping to resolve both the refugee crisis and the ongoing conflict in Syria.
Many nations and world leaders have attempted to lend aid to refugees seeking asylum. Turkey has taken in over 1.9 million refugees who have fled the conflict in Syria. Another 1.1 million have fled to Lebanon, nearly 637,000 have been taken in by Jordan, and Germany is expected to take in 800,000 refugees by the end of the year.
While many have been welcoming to the refugees, many throughout Europe have come out viscerally against accepting refugees. The Prime Minister of Slovakia has refused to accept any refugees and while a spokesperson for the Hungarian Government said they would abide resettlement of refuges, the government has also constructed a 109-mile razor tipped fence around its border to keep migrants out of their country.
Meanwhile the United States has accepted 1,500 refugees thus far and is preparing to accept at least 10,000 Syrian refugees. This figure would be allocated out of a U.S. quota of 75,000 total refugee admissions slated for the next fiscal year. Many Americans; however, fear that even this is too many. Congressional Republicans have raised concerns for months over the possibility that Syrian extremists, including ISIS sympathizers, could enter the country passing themselves off as refugees.
It is understandable that when the world is faced with a horrific crisis, that fear seizes the hearts of many. Undeniably, there are challenges when meeting a crisis of this magnitude. While the future is unclear; however, history is always there to guide us.
History most clearly remembers actions, or the lack there of. Following Kristallnacht, thousands of Jewish refugees from Germany and Austria fled to the United States trying to escape the growing shadow of Nazism. Then as now, the conflict seemed to many Americans to be a distant one and none of our affairs. Then as now, many people feared what would happen if we accepted these refugees in the wake of the nation’s economic turmoil. Ultimately the United States never increased its quotas for refugees, and as a result many lives that could have been saved were lost.
We are once again faced as a nation with people seeking refuge from a faraway conflict. Men, women, and children all hoping to find peace and mercy in a world that they know is far too often chaotic and unmerciful. We can either chose to commit the same mistake twice, or we can act like the world leader that we truly want to be.
Cover Photo Credit: Takver/Flickr (CC by SA-2.0)
Like this piece? Rise News just launched a few weeks ago and is only getting started. Follow us on Facebook and Twitter to stay up to date with global news. Have a news tip? Send it to us- email@example.com.Post Views: 282
What Do You Think?
Over the course of American history, politicians have adopted a clever, yet nefarious way of using racial stereotypes as a tool for political gain.
From the War on Drugs that frames black men as “criminals” to the emergence of the so called “welfare queen,” history has shown us that framing particularly disadvantaged groups as “dangerous” or “unworthy” enables politicians to gain political support from the public, particularly white middle and low-class Americans.
If I had to sum up, in two words, the United States’ racial marginalization of the poor and financially dependent, “welfare queen” is as good and as bad as it gets.
The myth of the welfare queen is still a prominent weapon used today in U.S politics that tends to go unnoticed.
The U.S political system has maintained these false ideas about marginalized people in our society by reducing them to a second class citizen status and enacting discriminatory policies that perpetuate durable systems of injustice within our democracy.
The legacy of legal discrimination persists in our society today as low-income mother’s struggle to gain and maintain financial benefits from the government.
The burden of the welfare queen has become one of the most cutting stereotypes that plagues families across the United States.
It hurts because it has worked in changing policy.
The birth of this political myth emerged after the criminalization of Linda Taylor, an African American woman, who quickly became the embodiment of a pernicious stereotype after being sentenced to prison for welfare fraud in 1977.
Ronald Reagan gave a speech in his unsuccessful 1976 campaign for president that managed to frame poor African American and Latina mothers as “users of the system” without any concrete evidence other than the act of a single woman.
“She used 80 names, 30 addresses, 15 telephone numbers to collect food stamps, Social Security, veterans’ benefits for four nonexistent deceased veteran husbands, as well as welfare. Her tax-free cash income alone has been running $150,000 a year.”
One woman who cheated the system evidently became the face of all welfare recipients, despite the fact that white families, typically, have been more likely to be on welfare.
Although it is not entirely clear all of which she fraudulated, Reagan’s intent became less about exposing the ways in which “liberal policies” had fractured the economy and more about turning the white American majority against minorities as a tool for political gain.
Reagan’s attack on welfare suggested that programs such as these, paid by tax dollars, only aided irresponsible black people.
Using the story of Linda Taylor, Reagan labeled millions of America’s poorest people as “deceitful” and funneled the belief that welfare fraud was a nationwide epidemic that needed to be terminated.
This image of widespread and unbridled welfare fraud allowed Reagan to convince voters to support his cuts to public assistance spending.
This was not the first instance that an American politician used self serving tactics to turn the public against the poor and displaced.
Much like the coined term “American Negro” the welfare queen became a convenient target for hate by simply framing Linda Taylor as the stereotypical lazy, black con artist.
Despite the fact that Reagan gave Taylor the most critical identity, the welfare queen stemmed from a longer and much deeper racialized history of prejudice and animosity toward families receiving welfare benefits in the United States.
This inequitable idea of the “deserving poor” and “undeserving poor” became a political weapon that Reagan introduced into U.S politics that his forerunners would all sustain.
Today, over 20 years after the implementation of Bill Clinton era welfare reform, the unwarranted stigma against poor women of color remains.
This telling of the “welfare queen” as users of the system continues to influence public policy by distinguishing between those who are “deserving” of support and those who are not.
President Donald Trump’s administrative budget cuts are now putting Americans on edge, especially those who rely heavily on public assistance programs.
Trump’s budget will potentially force millions of poor people off of food stamps and benefit programs such as Medicaid.
A recent article from Time Magazine states:
Cuts include a whopping $193 billion from food stamps over the coming decade — a cut of more than 25 per cent — implemented by cutting back eligibility and imposing additional work requirements, according to talking points circulated by the White House. The program presently serves about 42 million people.
Among these 42 million people, is my own mother, a 59 year old, single Latina mother suffering from chronic kidney disease, who directly relies on welfare benefits.
Being raised by a single mother on public assistance has allotted me with a perspective that a majority of politicians and policy makers could never understand.
It is clear that public policy continues to reflect the interests of the elite rather than the needs of the poor.
Such conditions only further the economic and racial divide in the U.S and perpetuates existing stereotypes about families and women receiving government assistance.
Although my mother has been on welfare my whole life, she is not your stereotypical “welfare queen.”
She is not Linda Taylor nor is she a “user of the system.”
My mother is a woman who managed to raise six children on her own with the little help she did receive from programs like Food Stamps, Medicaid, and Social Security.
Yet, our story will remain under the scrutiny of those who may have never had to step foot in a welfare office.
Ending the myth of the welfare queen within public policy means acknowledging how we manifest these stereotypes in our everyday lives.
It means recognizing that one person’s mistake cannot suddenly be the burden of others that look like them.
For far too long, our society has reduced people of color to a second class citizen status, resulting in the unremitting struggle to overcome the burden of such baseless conclusions.
We must overcome this myth by restructuring and developing policy around families as they are—not who society deems them to be.
Rather than stigmatizing recipients of public assistance programs, the government must strengthen the ways in which these programs respond to critical social and economic needs.
Even more so, we must acknowledge how failure to reconcile the racial discrimination of our nation’s past infringes our ability to ensure that all Americans have the dignity they deserve in the present.
We can fight against this stigma by advocating for the full participation of all Americans our society and the economy.
Instead of dwelling on individual failures or mistakes, we should be asking ourselves how we got here and how we can move towards a more equitable society.
RISE NEWS is a news organization that is working to change the way young people become informed and engaged in the world. You can write for us.
Watch More: 96 Year Old WWII Veteran Still Works At His North Miami Beach Barbershop
Cover photo credit: U.S. ArmyPost Views: 390
What Do You Think?
The personnel jacket of North Miami police officer Jonathan Aledda does not include information regarding whether he was properly trained to interact with people with developmental disabilities like Autism, a RISE NEWS investigation found.
Aledda has come to national attention after he shot unarmed therapist Charles Kinsey three times in the leg last week in a North Miami street.
The Miami-Dade police union president said that Aledda was not trying to shoot Kinsey, but rather his autistic patient named Arnaldo Eliud Rios.
The jacket, which was released by the police department last week details Aledda’s history as a police officer in the city of North Miami.
It also shows some of the trainings Aledda received.
Notably missing from the document is any indication that Aledda received Crisis Intervention Team Policing training (CIT) from the Eleventh Circuit Court.
CIT is often cited by police departments as a top local training method for officers to learn how to deal with people with mental illnesses.
The training also includes a small section (one page) about Autism and other developmental disabilities.
North Miami police spokeswoman Natalie Buissereth said that roughly 85% to 95% of North Miami officers have received CIT training.
“If you don’t see it, it’s not there,” Buissereth said of Aledda’s missing CIT training certificate in his personnel jacket.
However, Buissereth also said in a phone interview with RISE NEWS, that she would follow up to double check whether Aledda was CIT trained.
Calls to the CIT office have not been returned.
According to information found on the Eleventh Circuit website, CIT officers are pretty important.
“CIT officers respond to crisis calls involving possible mental health issues,” a frequently asked question page about the program says. “They evaluate and de-escalate potentially volatile situations and as necessary transport individuals suffering from a mental illness to community-based facilities for evaluation, treatment, and referrals, instead of subjecting them to immediate arrest when appropriate.”
WATCH: RISE NEWS report from the scene of the Charles Kinsey shooting
Aledda’s personnel jacket paints him as an ambitious and talented young officer who is always volunteering for extra responsibilities.
“Officer Aledda reports to work with a clean and pressed uniform,” A performance evaluation from June of 2016 reads. “He represents a good image for his peers and employees to follow.”
While it is not clear whether Aledda was trained in how to deescalate stations with people who have developmental disabilities, his personnel jacket does show that he is trained in a number of other areas, including as a member of the SWAT team and as a volunteer member of the Strategic Action for Enhanced Enforcement and High Intense Visibility and Enforcement teams.
According to a performance review from August 2014, Aledda “productivity” is “consistently substantially above his peers.”
For example, in July of 2014, Aledda conducted 26 arrests, answered 82 calls for service and issued 138 traffic citations.
For comparions sake, 1 out of every 68 people are autistic.Post Views: 358
What Do You Think?