delighted that we're doing this conversation today. They're topic today of un-silencing the vote, fighting for voting rights and suppression hotspots. And we've heard a lot over the last day and a half about how hard the struggle is and it is a very real truth. And I'm really excited to be joined by the people who are on the front lines of the struggle and who are making food. So let me introduce them, left to right or your right to left. To my right is Dwight Fuller who is the senior political advisor for Florida Rising and a former Florida State Senate civil rights project as well as the chair of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. Sam Liber to her right is local and then we're also joined by Danielle Wang who is the senior director of voting rights at the campaign legal centers. We're based in Washington. We look at democracy issues at home as well as around the world. We've crossed the United States and we've certainly heard it on other panels. We have heard so many real stories about how the foundational right that we all have as Americans and any kind of democracy is a right to vote is under attack. You know, tactics of all kinds being used, ones that look legal, ones that use legal means and some that are just even other ways to really vote in action. So thank you that my people are learning lessons from each other, the good with the bads and energy among communities, community leaders, state leaders who are taking back what all of us should have, which is that right to vote. So I'm very thankful for the work that all of the panelists are doing and look forward to our conversation today. I'm going to start with a question for everyone and give our panelists a chance to reflect and then go one by one with some questions. So let me ask if you can just characterize what you're seeing in your stage or in the work that you're doing as the greatest threat to voting rights, but also where you see progress leading us to a level set to start and I think we'll start with you. Thank you. Thanks so much for the invitation to be here. I want to let you know that oftentimes people ask, well, what is voter suppression? Let's start from the basis of can we get everyone who is eligible and those who should be eligible to vote as a starting vote and then anything that hinders that is voter suppression. That way it's not sticky or who's doing what. Let's start from the foundation of everyone should have access and if there's something impeding that, use their bra on the test. In Florida, I do the bad news first. For those who don't know, Florida was a Confederate state. Florida was the state, statistically, where you can most likely be lynched of all the southern states. So we think about voter suppression, we think about the existence of systemic interstitial racism. Florida does not get the credit it deserves for being as overtly problematic as it pertain to its racial history and history of racial violence relating to voting as it has been. Florida put very early on something in its constitution that would prohibit returning citizens from having the right to vote. The good news is, in 2018, thanks to the hard work of a number of folks, most importantly, Desmond B. who deserves all the flowers and all the credit for being in the forefront, Florida became the space where 1.4 million individuals who had been denied the right to vote since 1868 finally got that back and we struck from our constitution this thing that said anyone who's committed crimes could not engage in the franchise. So we're proud of that. We're proud to know that since then, so many ballot initiatives have flourished, including the first southern state to pass a $15 worth of wage and then and so many other things. And so we realize in spite of our depiction on immediate news is combating all of those expanding democracy as quickly as possible. What does it look like in Texas? Great threats as well as what progress? I mean, Texas, we have a lot of threats to our democracy, to the ability to vote. I always kind of looked at it as just, you know, the denial of people's humanity and their ability to exercise their right to participate in democracy as a person. We see the Texas legislature passing bills that make it incredibly hard for people to vote, whether that's voting by mail and that impacts people with disabilities, elderly communities. We've seen the Secretary of State of Texas pull voters off the voter registration rolls because they wanted them to prove that they were a citizen unable to vote. So these are some of the challenges that we've been seeing. It's been ongoing for a very long time. SB 1 is probably the biggest bill that came out of the last legislative session. They did partisan poll watchers, allowing people to intimidate voters at the polls. And my organization, Texas Civil Rights Project has used a community learning model to address those issues. So we're using a combination of advocacy, putting pressure on electives, and paying attention to what's happening during the legislative session to make some of these geniuses expand access to voting. So in addition to two-fold that is happening in Texas, you've got a lot of organizations that are branding together to fight some of these bills. This last session, you were able to put voters with disabilities or curbside when that we had, you know, on the litigation front, we're doing. We're doing on SB 1 along with a bunch of other organizations that are trying to stop these provisions from preventing access to voting. So, you know, at the same time, I know Texas has a lot of challenges, and everyone talks about Texas because we know what happens in Texas, never stays in the state. It is always the testing ground for bad laws across the country, but there are a lot of people that are fighting back all across the state. Good morning. Good afternoon, I guess, at this point. Everyone, my name is Sam, and I live in Wisconsin. And yes, I like cheese curds. If you want to see me later, you want to buy some. I don't know. So, with all voting as local, one of the main threats that we're really watching in election sabotage, so that's, you know, really, that's the intentional and purposeful manipulation of either the electoral system or the different levers within the state laws or administrative policies to essentially affect the outcome of the votes that were cast in a legal and fair election. So, a lot of things that we see with this is sort of the 1950s style of counting ballots. There's a movement to switch from electronic tabulation to hand counting elections. There is, we have one of the strictest voter ID laws on the books in the states that disproportionately affects folks of color, college students, even senior citizens. We have a large First American Native American population in Wisconsin, as well as a large lung population. So, this disproportionately affects historically disenfranchised people. And we also have threats and perceived threats against our election officials. And so, that's something that we're watching and seeing a trend growing nationally. And one of the, I guess, lights at the end of the tunnel is this past spring election. We have a turnout for our Supreme Court justice race, someone who, for democracy, since this is non-partisan, I keep it non-partist, since it's 6 o'clock. I've got two daughters, one of them's definitely she thinks she already is. But, so yeah, we're seeing people being re-engaged between spring elections that Wisconsin is known for. I've been historically sleepy, won't turn out. And that has changed. People are waking up, they're learning about what's going on and they're reactivating. So, we're happy to see that. I just want to say thank you everyone for having me on this panel. And it's exciting to be kind of sitting next to a lot of folks that have gone states specific and try to provide a little bit of the national perspective as well. You know, from voter intimidation and the felony disenfranchisement to election sabotage and pet thoughts on mail loading, I think that what we've identified here is that there isn't one single biggest threat. There is, you know, as I've said before, anti-voter attacks these days do look like about 5,000 times. But I just want to shine a light on one of those attacks that I think is really foundational, which are attacks on voter registration. So, we know that the most likely reason someone's not going to vote on election day is because of an issue with registration. Turnout rates are, you know, you're likely going to voting after you've registered to vote goes way up from turnout. That's why we passed the National Voter Registration Act because we knew that with lower barriers to registration, we would improve in our mail. We also know that the biggest problem on election day is folks showing up to vote and finding out that they're not registered to vote. That is always the number one problem reported to election protection hotline. It's the number one reason provisional ballots are not counted. So, we know that voter registration is the greatest barrier to access to the polls. And that is why we are seeing increasing attacks on voter registration. And if you think about it, it makes a lot of sense because if you're a legislator who is not interested in kind of catering to your voters and be responsive to your voters, but only interested in kind of picking your voters, then freezing your electorate in place, the electorate that elected you in place and not allowing new voters in, voters that are disproportionately voters of color, that are disproportionately young voters, you are going to have an extraordinarily effective way of voter suppression. And so, what are some of the things we're seeing now? I think we're seeing the attacks on multiple. So, I'm headed to trial in Arizona in the case where Arizona passed a documentary for citizenship requirement for voter registration quite some years ago. It went all the way up to the Supreme Court in a 7-2 opinion written by Justice Scalia that the court held that they could not enforce that under the National Voter Registration Act. Rather than give up on it, what Arizona ended up doing was creating this dual voter registration system that's very confusing in order to vote for state and local elections. You have to provide this documentary group, but not for federal elections. They turned around a year and a half ago and said, you know, we think this court has changed and we're going to pass a new law that is an open very recent Supreme Court decision to re-up residence requirement, which as you can imagine not only adds to the bureaucracy and paperwork requirements, but also disproportionately affects students, transient folks, native voters, rural voters who don't have easy access to that kind of paperwork. So by the way, if you don't provide your place of birth on your voter registration form, we will deny your voter registration. Now, if they raise a question to you, why do you need to know the place of birth of a voter? The answer is that you don't unless you're planning on discriminating against that on the basis of whether or not they were born in the United States or not. So these are some of the issues that are headed to trial in Arizona, but we see very similar issues elsewhere. As you mentioned, Arizona kind of took some of this playbook from Texas in the way that they planned to urge voters based on outdated information about citizenship status from driver's license. And at the same time that we're raising these barriers for registration, we are also seeing attacks on the groups that are doing the civic engagement to help folks overcome those barriers, criminalizing voter registration drives. So these are some of the areas that my program has been really focused on litigating, protecting the person that writes in the groups that are out there getting folks registered, helping them overcome barriers, and bringing those barriers down. Now you did ask me to talk about kind of the positives, and I just want to say that this is also a place where voters understand these barriers and they are overwhelmingly in support of problems and solutions like automatic voter registration and same day registration. We actually have the technology now to have voter registration systems that are so much more advanced than when we passed the National Voter Registration Act. Everyone should be able to register on the same day that they vote. That's very possible, and it's growing in popularity back in every year. We have new states and modernizing their voter registration systems. Excellent, excellent. Thank you. Sam, I want to come back to something that you talked about with voter intimidation. Can you just explain what you're seeing in Wisconsin and also what are the steps that have taken to counter intimidation that we're seeing in Wisconsin, but in many many places across the nation? Sure. So when it comes to voter intimidation, we've seen, for example, in some instances, we've seen quote-unquote poll watchers from maybe rural or some suburban areas come into the larger cities like Baxter, Milwaukee and to sort of have these militia folks where they weren't perceived or maybe we had open carry in Wisconsin.  So we have instances of that. We also have instances of intimidation of our election officials in Wisconsin. Our elections are run at the municipal level with 1,850 municipalities in Wisconsin. So every town, village and city has a municipal clerk that is responsible for administering those elections. We've seen a huge, huge increase in internal clerks leading the profession. And that's a very unfortunate thing. It's a very technical job. It's a very high stress job, but it's very important. And in many instances, these positions are in small towns, they're elected. And so I think also, too, you have the, again, sort of the election sabotage components of maybe that faith act is running for local clerk winning an election. And the way that law is working in Wisconsin when it comes to elections is essentially it's up to the local clerk to interpret the law, right? So if you're small town clerk and maybe work 10 hours a week that you've got a small town project, you're probably not a lawyer, right? You're probably not, maybe you don't have a master's degree. Maybe you do. I don't know. I don't want to like, you know, silo everyone, but for the most part, these are just regular citizens running for local office because they want to get back. And so you have a lot of issues there, right, across the board. But again, I think there's a lot of things that we can do to protect not only voters, but also election officials. There's actually bipartisan bill right now, making the legislature to, right now, it's only a misdemeanor. If you either harass or physically assault an election official, we're looking to get that puffed up to a felony. And we're also looking to increase how much financial sort of processing would be or how much jail time it would be if you, again, harass or physically assault an election official.  Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. We heard something in one of the earlier sessions or even session yesterday about how weak the infrastructure really is across the country on protecting election officials, right? Protecting our voters is coming along never sufficiently, but we need to look at both. We're showing you more about how, what does that coordination look like on the grassroots and then the legal and the passing laws, but also the litigation as well. How is that coordinated and having to work that together to have it happen? I think a lot of it has to do with building infrastructure and making sure that our elections are protected. Test Civil Rights Project runs the largest election protection program in the state of Texas and we partner with tons of organizations, local counties. We also partner with national organizations. It is a big, big effort.  If there are things happening on the ground, you know, for example, you know, a polling location ran out of paper ballots or did not open on time. So things like that, that can be fly by folks that are on the ground at these polling locations that have volunteered to be there to watch what is happening and then using litigation strategies around, around those particular issues. So that's the election protection arm that is, that is an effort across the state of Texas. I do think there are other issues with, you know, countywide polling. This has 254 counties and not every single county, you are able to vote anywhere inside that county. You have to have your county open it up.  And typically, you know, if you're working in some other part of the county or you're working out of the county, you're not going to be able to go to your polling location. So that is, that is an effort that we see that we need to, we need to combat. So that's another tool that we can utilize in order to expand access to voting and making sure that people are not sent, sent to their, to their county, their precinct where they have to vote on the day of the election when it is open county. So just a few, not just voting rights, but also the other issue areas that we work on like criminal injustice and bordered immigration issues and partnered with legislators to make sure that we were combating some of those bad laws that were coming through and then bringing community members that were experiencing issues on the ground to come and testify at the Texas Capitol. So it's about engaging communities across this massive state because it is huge. I live in Brownsville, Texas, and that is a five hour drive, no, six hour drive to Austin, Texas. So, and then just to get out of the state, it's 12 hours. So, you know, it is a massive state, but making sure that we get communities engaged in what is happening at the Capitol is also another thing that our organization and our partners are invested in and will continue to be invested in. Excellent. Dwayne, let me pick up on something that Rochelle was just saying.  What does it look like to educate our legislators to put the issues out there, help them understand them and help them understand them in a way that they can be part of the solution and to also mobilize citizens to be part of that process? Yeah, I mean, it's always an ongoing process, especially state like Florida where you have high turnover, turn limits, things that kind of impact the face of what the legislature looks like in any given year. But also, as I mentioned at the onset, this notion of what is voter suppression. And I think sometimes folks get caught up in the access versus security battle. It's a false truth. Access should always be the the paramount. And as I mentioned at the beginning, anything that is an impediment to that needs to find its way. As an example, people will come back, both Democrats and Republicans, and say, well, we need stronger voter ID laws. Cool. Are you going to provide voter ID for everybody who's eligible or should have access? If the answer is no, then we have a problem. You know, and the point I raise is, when you think about our houseless and homeless population, there are this portion of the number of veterans nationwide, but state by state, that make up our homeless population is someone I pose the question to elected officials, irrespective of party and say, is it right that a person who sacrificed themselves in Iraq or Afghanistan, who is now houseless or homeless, to be kept from the polls because they don't have any physical address across the board? Well, that ain't right. What would we do then to fix that? Right? If they don't have, you know, if they have disability issues, physical access, and you don't want to always afraid about veterans, but I always pose at the heart of elected officials because now it's like, here's someone that you say, you know, and of course our folks in Florida like to say, we're the most different state in the union. It's like, are you ridden? If there are people who cannot vote, who sound really bitterly and in so many other ways to be protected. So it starts frame this, but also, and as a former elected, I have to impress this upon folks, you're oftentimes the smarter person. Sit with that. And what I mean by that is, it's this notion of putting people on a pedestal that because they hold the title or some particular committee that they're knowledgeable about what that really has to do or democracy itself. You have a thousand people or, you know, in the hard case, 160 people swear, you know, put their hand on the Bible and pray for the place within the Constitution and then go out daily finding new, innovative ways to violate the Constitution, right? And do that. And so for you all who are trying to work on election protection, talk about democracy expansion, talk about the notion of voting rents, go on with the data, go on with the facts, understand you are smarter than the person you're talking to. I'm not saying that to be condescending towards that person, but don't be under this assumption that you're all equal footing or that that person sitting across from you understands the jargon or legalese or the conversation that you're having. You have to put it through the terms, terminology, and language that they can receive. So their district is disproportionately older folks and you're talking about ageism or the inability for a 65 plus person to access the ballot box, put it in that framework. If they have colleges, you know, in their district and talk about the notion of 18 to 24 year olds, you know, not having a place on campus to go vote, you know, give it an election year, that's a conversation. So kind of baseline it based on who you're, who you're talking to and then when you're talking about democracy as a whole, remind them again, as I mentioned at the level setting, if they are passing laws that in any way prohibit or enable somebody or, you know, disable somebody from being able to access the ballot box, then they are working in voter suppression.  Let me show you your voting record and tell you how you meant it, right? Well, I'm military. Let me show you what you did that kept your fellow veterans from being able to access the franchise and to be very blunt in those times. A real question to Danielle, but we love folks to be thinking about whether you have questions, I want you to be part of the conversation. Danielle, gerrymandering is obviously an issue nationally. Can you just tell us how you're thinking about that, how that intersects with the challenge? How it is a tool of or intersects with voter suppression? Yes, absolutely. So at CLC, we kind of work across a number of issue areas affecting our democracy and the redistricting teams and the voting rights teams work really closely together. We've got for a couple of reasons. One is that now a lot of the same legal tools that we work with like the Voting Rights Act, right? Most obviously. The Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act is our most critical remaining federal legal tool to protect against both racial gerrymandering and ways in which we dilute the vote of minority voters through redistricting. It's also the most potent tool we have to deal with direct anti-voter attacks on voters of color at the kind of ballot box level. We have lost a lot of our legal tools when it comes to gerrymandering. So we used to have like at least the possibility out there of bringing claims around partisan gerrymandering. The Supreme Court took that off the table and so partisan gerrymandering has kind of gone through the roof in the last cycle and there's no kind of clear check inside. Now, luckily we did get an excellent and somewhat surprising Supreme Court decision this year of holding Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. So we still have that critical tool to help protect minority voters in redistricting. But we know that gerrymandering is extraordinarily harmful to kind of trying to turn votes into responsive government. But I think for this conversation it's also really useful to talk about how these types of policies around voting and translating votes into results can either be virtuous cycles or really not virtuous cycles. So if you have a redistricting plan that is representative and responsive to its voters, you're also likely to see better voter policies because those elected officials are going to feel accountable to the American people and the American people overwhelmingly support voter policies. Just look at any ballot initiative that gets on the ballot in a red, blue, green, purple state. They all pass with flying colors because American people support voter policies. So if you have kind of officials that feel directly responsible to their voters, you're more likely to get voter policies. On the other hand, if you have elected officials that do not feel responsible to their voters because they have gerrymandering themselves into safe seats, well then they can continue in that kind of non-virtuous cycle by further making themselves safe through other anti-voter policies. And I think in one example I wanted to point to in light of this conversation is an issue we're seeing in Tennessee today. So Tennessee has all sorts of gerrymandering issues. It has a kind of super majority Republican legislature that just does not have much accountability to the Black voters in its state. And as a result, it is also the state, I think, with the most anti-voter access policies in the country. And they're only getting worse. So I have been litigating for years against the process for restoration for people with past convictions in Tennessee. Tennessee has one of the strictest laws in the country.  They did a terrible job of administering that process so that it was almost impossible to get through. We were headed to trial in a case about procedural due process rights for the people. But they just have a right to go through the process and have that process work and be fair and that if they need the qualification, they get their voting rights back. The state had lost a number of interim battles in that court battle and were headed to trial. They decided to turn around and cynically use a new interpretation of the Tennessee state of law to say we don't actually think any of these people are entitled to rights restoration at all. Issued guidance saying now in order to get your rights restored, you actually have to have a court order restoring your voting rights. Something that had not been the law in almost two years in the state of Tennessee. The Secretary of State did that unilaterally and there is really very little accountability in a state that is so deeply gerrymandered and that does not have kind of elected officials that feel responsible to the black voters in the state. Thank you for that explanation. I'm going to open it up to the audience and look to your questions. So if people want to raise their hand, we'll go right here, one, two, three. Guy Camilleri, National Tennessee, Civic Tennessee, and we'll go on the table there. Yeah, sorry. Sorry. I'm going to walk on by two. Thank you. I'm curious if any of you have seen as we've seen with the election panels and things abroad, all the rolling back voting rights past couple legislative sessions, are there any red track specter states that are actually expanding the franchise at this sort of at this time? So I will give an interesting example from Florida. We are a red track specter state and kind of inadvertently passed automatic voter registration, but not through the legislature, right? So it was basically a regulatory rule where the DMV now makes it ask you the question and gives you the option to opt out.  Mark it in the system. If you choose to say nothing by default, they'll send it to the address in your driver's license. Now that has led to an uptick or balance out if you will. Everyone frame it of the voter registration number between Democrats and Republicans where 10 years ago there was a sizable advantage for Democrats in the state of Florida. Part of that has to do with the notion of equity. And what I mean by that is who are the people that are least likely to have access to the DMV? And this has become one of those questions. And so even though regulatory policy advantage that and now have that, you still now have a drop off in the number of black and brown folks that are eligible to get driver's license, able to get terms, or have the money, frankly, to get driver's licenses. So that's kind of has ended that. So it's, it's where it goes, where your catch going to. This is primarily for a question for Dania. I have two questions. One, you mentioned that some of these voter registration forms are asking for asking for where people are born. And that's alarming. Do you also know of any instances where that information is being used in any way? Or there's like legislation or there's any effort to like prevent naturalized citizens from voting? That's number one. And my second question, it's about seven states. I think about seven states pulled out of Eric, the voter, the data sharing system that, I don't know, about 25 or 28 states shared to to share their voter rolls and keep their voter rolls clean. Is that part of a voter suppression drive of these states? Can you speak a little bit about that? Yes. So Arizona is the only state right now that is trying to require a place of birth, a required field for voter registration. They're a handful of other states that have it on their form, but I think they mostly just use it for kind of, maybe some demographic analysis, but I'm not aware of it being used in the various ways. But it's really hard to not read the Arizona law as an attempt to use it in a various way, especially because if you read the rest of the law, it's paired with a whole bunch of other ways in which they are targeting naturalized citizens. So they're going to look at all DMV data, the thing that was stale. They're going to look at any other database that they can find, knowing that those data that might show that say that someone is not a citizen or get naturalized citizens, those data that's old that says we were not a citizen. There will be old data out there that says you weren't a citizen at that time. It's just not that complicated. So it's hard to read Arizona as any other way. And it's paired with language about prosecutions. If you are, you know, being like mandatory referrals for prosecutions and what that says, very concerning. And I don't think it's likely to pass master, but you know, I am out of the court prediction business. On the question of Eric, yes, I think it is. And, you know, for those of you don't know, Eric was this kind of pretty brilliant and incredibly hard one system of data sharing that, you know, by all accounts was achieving some of what folks who talk about election integrity should want. You know, using data across states to make sure that when folks move, they get removed from one state and invited to register in the state where they have moved. It both kept the voter rolls clean, but also made sure that those voters were being given opportunities where they have moved. And this exodus has been led by kind of a complete disinformation campaign to try to sneer what has been a bipartisan effort to improve voter registration rules. And it's hard to see it as anything other because of that. And you have people like George's secretary of state, Brad Rappensperger, and all sorts of other, you know, Republican and Democratic election officials coming forward and just saying, this is an incredibly useful tool. What do you want us to do without it? Leading states in the lurch. All of a sudden, they don't have all the state that they're used to relying on to keep their voter registration rolls up to date. What does that do? It creates the likelihood of having more stale data on the voter registration rules, which then folks will use in a nefarious way to suggest that there are some, you know, opens to fraud or whatnot, because those rolls are genuinely outdated. It also creates a vacuum where I think far less, you know, far less effective and also far less accurate programs could try to fill the gap. So, you know, Chris Coback used to have this system called a cross check that was attempting to do this voter sharing exercise, except for it was always wrong. It was constantly cross checking data based on like two data points and, you know, the probability of the data saying that I had moved was like most of the time wrong. And so the result was they were removing people based on this cross check that really had no variability. And so I think that, you know, removing states from Eric is going to be a created vacuum where those states can then use systems like cross check that are going to be extraordinarily harmful to voters and lead to a lot of purges and kind of highlight the problem I said at the top here about, you know, voters showing up at the polls thinking they're registered and finding themselves not in the rolls. Hi, Paul Allen, Oklahoma Policy Institute. Sam, you mentioned earlier a push in, Wisconsin to add a felony conviction for people who intimidate or harass poor workers. We had a similar building up for HOMA that came through our session this year, but we actually pushed against that. We had a really strong push over the past few years. We know new felonies. And so I was wondering what, from a voter rights perspective, we can do to protect our election officials without introducing new felonies or over-policing precincts, which we can figure will allow lead to intimidation of voters, especially voters of color, and make some pretty bad trends in the criminal legal system. Sure. So the question was, what are other ways that we can protect election workers? Well, so one thing that we do with all voting and all voting is all Wisconsin. One of the programs that we run is called the Court Engagement Program. And through that program, we're not naturally a grassroots campaign, but we do partner with other 501c3s to sort of run this campaign. And what we do is we find volunteers and communities who want to support their local court. Many times, courts are underpaid, overworked. And so we sort of help build these support teams around municipal courts to help them out. And some of the items that we work on through this program is helping them recruit and retain new poll workers to work with their local boards to increase their budgets every year. A lot of time, there's been a lot of pushback on election officials accepting private grants, you know, the zucker bucks and all these other things that are out there. And it's like, well, courts wouldn't be looking for more money if we just properly funded our elections and then there are officials in the first place, we won't have an issue. And so I think that's a way to support our courts through these volunteer programs. You know, another way to support our courts as well. Again, I guess that through the recruitment of poll workers is in many communities, sometimes when we found folks who are either election deniers, or maybe they don't understand the full election process, is then to invite them to a poll worker training. And I think once people, once you've sort of pulled the sheet from, you know, see who's behind the, you know, the great Oz, right, behind the sheet there, they really see that in Wisconsin, especially, we have a very silent system, like I said, we have 8,250 municipal courts, then also we have 72 county courts that support the municipal courts. And then at each polling location, you have to have a minimum, I think, like three to five election workers. So on election day, you've got an army of 10, 12, 15,000 people statewide. And for a lot of our process is to, I think a big part of protecting election workers is education, educating the public. So at all voting as local, again, we work with partners to go around the state and hold town hall meetings, with courts, with the general population to talk about all elections work. And a lot of our mechanisms in Wisconsin, when you have to sign off on the chain of custody or ballots, or who's turning on the tabulator in the morning and who's reporting the numbers at night, many times you have to have either every poll worker in that location looked and say, yes, this is correct to sign off on it. And many times you have to have both a Republican and a Democrat poll worker signing off on a lot of these checks and balances. So I always tell people in Wisconsin, they would, you'd have to have Democrats and Republicans colluding together essentially to do that. So I think when you have education, and you educate the public, I think that's a huge defense tool because when you get folks on social media and that you can have educated people in your community saying, no, stop right there, that's wrong. This is, let me tell you how the elections work. And we found it to be pretty successful and hoping so. Yeah, just going back to the challenges that they're facing with being pulled up. This is something that happens when they can't get their bursary tickets from, and that is because they have been born with a midwife, it mostly impacts Latinos that are born in the United States. You know, it was in the news some time ago that the federal government was denying passports to these individuals saying that they weren't a citizen. It happened with my own family. I had my aunt who was denied her passport. But it is an issue that presbyterian being able to, you know, get a driver's license or to even go to school. So TCRP has done some litigation around this, especially around parents that need to get bursary tickets for their children. And they were being denied that by the state of Texas because they didn't have the proper identification because they were not citizens.  And so I think that, you know, in a state that is 40% Latino, that is 6% people of color. I mean, this is, this is part of something that you're going to see happen in other states. It is the testing ground to look at all of these issues as interconnected being able to exercise your right to vote to be a part of a functioning democracy. And it starts from way before being able to register to vote. We have time for one more question. I'm going to take a village to get that mic back. So thank you. Thank you. My question is for Mr. Bullard. I'm a Florida resident. And although my line of interest is activism is not technically have been, has been denied here today as registered registration, but I'm a non-partisan and an independent. I just like to get your quick reaction or opinion on the state of close primaries in Florida where there's four point, some million now that are not affiliated. And with 82, excuse me, 86% of the 2022 state of elections either being unopposed or uncompetitive. Just one of your thoughts on close primaries, please. Well, I want to start by saying that I'm an advocate for open primaries. I'm also an advocate for my interest. I think both are important tools to expand democracy. The challenge in Florida is that both parties benefit from close primaries. And so the advocacy at the state level is probably, you know, moved in terms of giving some level of agreements on modifying that or allowing folks. I was actually sharing with some of the panelists earlier that you now represent the largest political party in the state of Florida. 36% of our voters are now rich to the bees in the state of Florida, non-party affiliated, I apologize, are non-party affiliated voters. And so we now have a real challenge in terms of how you exercise representative democracy with the largest group of voters are no longer identifying with either party and how we address that. I know there has been on the bright side some conversation around same-day registration, at least getting on the ballot in one of the upcoming years, kind of intervening out a little bit, therefore allowing somebody in a moment's notice to then get into a space where they maybe want to register for a close primary on that day, then go back to the EPA the day after as their choice. But unfortunately, nothing is really surfacing from a, you know, policy standpoint to address the unfortunate reality of close primary voting. Thank you. We have just a couple more minutes, so I'm just going to allow the panelists to have final word, speed round. Anything that you want to share and it could be something that you're hopeful for, it could be something that you're concerned about that this audience needs to be aware of, but speed round, but I'll start with the video and come back this way. Yeah, absolutely. I feel like I'm kind of giving you all a lot to worry about, so I'm going to spend my speed round just saying something I'm very hopeful about that goes back a little bit to your question too about where we're seeing progress even in, you know, red states, let's say. And I think felony disenfranchisement is that point. It's right. It is our biggest barrier to equal and equitable participation with five million voters still disenfranchised, but it's also the place where we are seeing progress in red, blue, green states. Every single legislative session, we are seeing progress. We have seen major progress in states like Alabama, Louisiana, Florida. Those are not states we normally see on the list of like pro-voting agendas, but we have seen huge strides there. And in states that are more pro-voter, we are seeing moves towards complete abolishment of felony disenfranchisement. It's a place where there is incredible movement led by affected people. That kind of gives me a great deal of hope. I think for me, just actually coming to this conference has been very eye-opening. Again, a big part of the work that all voting as local does is coalition work. And so we're all about empowering our state partners and building each other up and communicating. And so that's what I would encourage folks to lead with of anything that talk to each other in state. Find like-minded 501c3 partners and others who believe in your mission. I think everyone here will be asked the same question. We might agree 75 to 80% of the thing, but I think for the most part we all agree that the more people that vote, the more people have access to the ballot box, the better election results we have. And then when we have that more representative government, we get the laws that we truly want and deserve. Well, thank you for having me here. I want to say that this has been a really wonderful experience and being able to share our experiences at the state level and hearing the national perspective. I think it's been really, really helpful and understanding that suppression tactics, they're very micro level. They start very, very small throughout each of our states. And I'm really just proud to be in coalition with all of you. And happy to chat with folks offline. Two warnings and an aspiration. First warning is watch out for attacks on democracy in terms of ballot initiative thresholds being raised. Many states are trying to go from 50% to 60%. And so we're trying to go to two thirds in order to pass a ballot initiative in your state. And that is a full on attack against democracy. Also, and I think Sam alluded to this, look out for election deniers at those hyper local spaces in Florida. In our 67 counties, we have supervisor for election. These are oftentimes overlooked races on the ballot. These are oftentimes overlooked in terms of people who want to run for those. But for the election denier, that is nothing but opportunity to advantage themselves and advantage their desire. And the aspiration is that what I'm seeing on the ground, not only in Florida, but even in national and other states, is a real yearning to expand democracy from 18 year olds to the, to the 99 year old people who really, really view this as an avenue, despite what the turnout numbers may be or whatever the case may be. Folks really don't like the idea of totalitarianism or fascism becoming the thing. And they see democracy and the expansion of democracy as an opportunity to hold on to what we had. And so lead into that.  We are unfortunately at time. I am taking away the struggle, as all of us know, is extraordinarily real. The importance of voting right is central to a democracy that's central to our engagement as citizens in one. But just as real as the struggles are so are the courageous people who are doing the work, and we got to hear from the four of them today, but all of you all are in that, and so many people in communities across the nation are those courageous people that are making the changes. The tools are there, but the struggle is real, but the progress is available and some of it's being made, but there's a lot more to do. And so I think Sam's admonition to us to be in coalition with each other and to really work together because we can bring that change. So join me in thanking our panelists for our great


T. F. N. N. headline news update. I run Basel Chapman says the T. F. N. N. Update. This is the noon time update and I'm the host of the Tiger Technicians Hour and the opening call. Deadly newsletter comprehensive newsletter coming up straight off to this update dows up. 168 points off to the good jobs report 26,476 still quite a bit underneath the 26,695 recent high on the 23rd of March and we're watching this very closely. The technicals are still quite weak. So let's see how this pans out within the next two days coming up on Tuesday. If on Tuesday we start to test the 26,350 area, that's going to mean that lower lows and lower highs in the foreseeable future at least for a short while. But if there is a push into the 26,530s by Monday, I have to admit that's a really good action. The S&P at this particular moment is actually a little bit better in terms of the recent high of 29,49.52 and the low that was made yesterday just at about 2900 because now it is more than halfway between the two. So at 29,40.24, that was the high of September. So we're back there. This is good action so far. Watch this closely. 29,48.52 area would be really good action if it's by Monday or Tuesday. Any pullback, yes, as the days are low will be very important to close below 29,29 in the next two days would not be very good. QQQ, NDX100 trading vehicle right up against resistance at 190.39, up 2.30, a lot has to do with Buffett talking about having a position in Amazon. So we'll see what happens there. In the meantime, it was underneath the 191.32 recent high of the 28th. IWM is actually turning out to be a little bit better. It's breaking out and it could, in fact, be a little bit of a leader. I think the IWM has a chance now to play catch up as some of the others have a little bit maybe not weakness, but they don't act as strongly. But most importantly, we were looking at gold, which is having a nice move up based on the dollar activity with the Fed. So it's up eight and the dollar right now, so eight at 1280, it still doesn't look great. But the DXY has pulled back quite sharply, but still pretty good in 97.57. I'll talk more about this, talk about Crudall and all the other things that are important. As soon as we get back from my show, the Tiger Technicians Hour, then you get Steve Rhodes, Dave White and Tom O'Brien wraps it up for the week. Have a great day, have a great day.


Hey everybody, Matt here for Leighton Sports Cards, ripping one box of 2022 Topps Clearly Authentic Baseball. This is for Martin M. Good luck, Martin. Let's see a nice hit here. It is rookie auto Josiah Gray. All right, Martin, that'll do it for your box. Appreciate the purchase. We'll get that right out to you.


A very good evening aspirants, I welcome you all to the daily Hindu newspaper analysis brought to you by Shankar A.S. Academy for the date of 10th June 2023. Displayed here are the list of articles that we are going to discuss today. Now without wasting any time, let us get into our discussion. This news article reports about the trilateral maritime partnership exercise that held in Gulf of Oman. Navies of three countries participated in the event which includes India, France and UAE. In this context, let us quickly go through the location of Gulf of Oman. See, Gulf of Oman is the northwest arm of Arabian Sea. The Gulf is 200 miles wide between Kepal Haad in Oman and Guaderbe on the Pakistan-Iran border. It connects with the Persian Gulf to the northwest through the Strait of Hormuz. The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow waterway that links the Persian Gulf with the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. In other words, the Gulf connects the Arabian Sea with the Strait of Hormuz which then empties into Persian Gulf. And it is bordered by Pakistan and Iran in the north by the United Arab Emirates in the west and by Oman in the south. The capital of Oman is located on the coast of the Gulf. The major Iranian cities that are located on the coastline of Gulf of Oman are Guaderbe, Jask and Chabah. Knowing about Gulf of Oman is very important because it is the only entrance from the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean into the Persian Gulf. The world's major oil exporters and importers have a joint interest in its security. Some of the significant islands that are located on the Gulf of Oman include Shaitan Island, Al Fahal Island, Daminiath Islands and the Sawadi Islands. The major international shipping ports that are situated in the Gulf of Oman include Port Sultan Kubu Smutra in Muscat Oman, Chabahar Port in Iran, the Port of Fujairah and Khor Fakhan Container Terminal in the United Arab Emirates. Talking about its ecology, see in 2018, scientists confirmed the Gulf of Oman contains one of the world's largest marine dead zones where the ocean contains very little or no oxygen and marine wildlife cannot exist. That's all. With this, let us move on to our next article for the discussion. Look at this article from the editorial page. The article talks about the electricity sector in India. See, the Electricity Act of 2003 brought about significant changes in the electricity sector. It separated the generation, transmission and distribution into separate companies. The article highlights the success of competitive procurement and long-term power purchase agreements because they drive private investment and reduce electricity prices. It explains why the UK's model of full deregulation and competition was not suitable for India due to potential price shocks. The article further emphasizes the importance of distribution companies, that is, this comes in ensuring a reliable electricity supply. So, in this discussion, we'll analyze this news article to get a better picture of it. Before that, the syllabus relevant to this article is given here. As I already mentioned, the article talks about how the Electricity Act of 2003 in India brought about significant changes in the electricity industry. Basically, the Act separated the generation, transmission and distribution of electricity into separate companies. It also provided the framework for the dismantling of state electricity boards. Here, the goal was to promote competition, protect consumer interests and ensure the supply of electricity to everyone. To explain this, let us use an example. Imagine you have a pizza making business. In the past, you used to handle everything from making the dough to delivering the pizzas. But now, under the new law, you decide to separate the task. One company will focus on making the dough, another on delivering the pizzas and the third on selling them to customers. By doing so, the government wanted to promote the competition among companies. More competition means more efficiency. After the reforms, the electricity generation in India has seen a lot of private investment. This means that more companies are investing their money to build power plants and generate electricity. The power plants started competing through long-term agreements to sell electricity to distribution companies. This competition resulted in lower prices for consumers compared to the old system. We know more competition means less price. Additionally, the Act played a crucial role in the success of national solar machine in India. It made solar power one of the cheapest sources of electricity in the country. Now, let us compare this with Eurotide Kingdom's model of electricity reform in the early 1990s. In the UK, they have a different approach to electricity reform. They created a power pool where all electricity generators would submit bits to supply electricity for the next day. The bits were arranged from the lowest to highest price. Then the price at which the total demand would be met will become the pool price for the electricity. However, in India, we did not adopt this model because it would have led to a sudden increase in electricity prices. For example, if the price of electricity from the most expensive power plant was set as the standard, then the price of electricity from other power plants also have to be purchased at the same price. This would have caused a big shock for consumers. So, instead, we continued with long-term contracts between power plants and distribution companies so that prices were determined individually. This ensured a gradual decrease in prices as power plants aged or in other words depreciated. This is because as the plant depreciates, the fixed cost component in the tariff declines. Therefore, older the plant, the cheaper its electricity. So, the current system that India has adopted has kept the prices of electricity stable. If we have gone for the UK model where the bits happen daily, it would have been difficult to keep a check on the price. But with long-term power purchase agreements, the price will be stable for a long period of time. Besides this, the discounts have helped to achieve the milestone of rural electrification. See, the discounts have the responsibility of supplying electricity to meet the demand of consumers. They enter into long-term contracts and thereby they ensure a reliable power supply. Besides this, in India, if you are a customer who consumes a load of 1 megawatt and above, then you have the right to choose where you buy your electricity from. You can buy directly from the power generators and pay the discount only for using the distribution network. However, the article mentioned few challenges. One of them is cross subsidy. This means that higher-end consumers like big businesses pay more for electricity to support lower-end consumers like households whose tariff are lower.  The cost of pizza is say 100 rupees, but rich customers have to pay 120 rupees and the poor customers have to pay only 80 rupees. This is how cross subsidy works. This cross subsidy surcharge acts as a barrier and prevents many large consumers from utilizing open access. Then the article also mentions power exchange, which are like marketplaces for electricity trading. Power exchanges allow power generators to sell any surplus electricity they have. The prices on these exchanges can be volatile depending on the demand. When the demand is low, the prices may be lower and when the demand is high, the prices can go up. So the prices in these exchanges can be volatile especially during the high demand periods. This may require price caps so that everyone can afford it to pay. Now let us discuss the challenges faced by the discounts. See, discounts are often seen as the weak link in the electricity supply chain. This is because of the rising losses and difficulties in paying generators on time. These problems stem from issues in the political and economic domain. It includes the inability of regulators to determine the cost-reflective tariffs and misgovernance in some states. In certain cases, privatization as seen in Delhi may be the solution to address these challenges. Now, the article raises a question about the idea of doing away with the discounts and relying solely on the free market to solve the problems in power sector. It argues that the challenges faced by the discounts are not just about implementing the reforms. Discounts also face political and governance issues. Simply removing the discounts may not solve the underlying problems. It is like saying that getting rid of delivery companies will solve all the challenges in a business. It is not that simple. Also, the transition to renewable energy sources is progressing. Discounts play a vital role in projecting future demand and entering into contracts to meet the growing electricity needs. Without them, the entire system would collapse and you might face power shortages again. To summarize, the article emphasizes the importance of distribution companies in the electricity sector. They play a crucial role in ensuring a reliable supply of electricity to consumers. The article also highlights the challenges and complexities of implementing reforms in the power sector. It is important to consider the lessons learned from other countries' experience such as the UK and think through the consequences of any proposed changes. I hope this explanation helped you to understand the key points of this article. That is all with this. Let us move on to our next article. The crux of the article is that, ongoing Australian High Commissioner to India, Barry O'Farrell stated that Australia aims to stabilize its relation with China, not normalize them. He compared Australia's approach to that of India and highlighted that both countries engage in dialogue with China to resolve bilateral issues and prevent further instability in the region. He also clarified that AUKUS agreement is not an alliance but a technology transfer agreement. He also mentioned that Australia supports the status quo in Taiwan. He acknowledged that Australian businesses learned during the COVID-19 pandemic that operating in a non-democracy like China can result in sudden market access restrictions. He also emphasized the importance of the Indian diaspora in Australia and the deepening relationship between India and Australia. In this context, let us use this opportunity to learn about the AUKUS. See, AUKUS is a security partnership between three countries, Australia, the UK and the US. The main goal of AUKUS is to promote freedom and openness in the Indo-Pacific region, specifically in the South China Sea. One important aspect of the partnership is that, the US and the UK will help Australia in acquiring nuclear-powered submarines that are armed with conventional weapons. In addition to submarines, the countries will also collaborate on advanced technologies such as cyber security, artificial intelligence, quantum technology and undersea capabilities. This partnership is significant because it strengthens Australia's naval power and serves as a challenge to China's ambition in the region. By working together, these countries aim to have better military coordination in Indo-Pacific which can help to address the regional security concerns. For India, the AUKUS partnership can offer some benefits by countering China's encirclement and providing access to advanced military expertise in the region. You may also wonder how this AUKUS is different from QUAD. See, the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue or QUAD is a strategic dialogue between the United States, India, Australia and Japan. It has a shared vision for a free and open Indo-Pacific. Whereas AUKUS is more like a technology sharing arrangement. AUKUS, as I earlier told, is a trilateral security alliance that allows the USA and the UK to help Australia to develop nuclear-powered submarines. That's all with this. Let us move on to our next topic. Take a look at this news article. The news article talks about the study result conducted by the World Health Organization which is commissioned by the Jal Shakti Ministry. The study says that if the centre succeeds in its Jaljiven mission, it would avert to close 4 lakh deaths from diarrhea. In this context, let us learn few facts about the Jaljiven mission. See, the government of India has restructured and subsumed the ongoing national rural drinking water program into Jaljiven mission. This is done to provide functional household tap connection to every rural household. That is Hargar-Nalseh Jal by 2024. From this itself, we can easily find out the vision of the program. So, the mission is envisioned to provide safe and adequate drinking water through individual household tap connections by 2024 to all households in rural India. Now, coming to the works done under the mission. The works or schemes carried out under the mission includes firstly, in village it develops water supply infrastructure for tap water connection to every household. Then it develops reliable drinking water source and augmentation of existing sources. Then it works on transfer of water. It is a multi-village scheme. Water is transferred to villages where quality and quantity issues are there in local water sources. Then it works on technological intervention for treatment to make the water portable. This is done where water quality is an issue but quantity is sufficient. Then it works on retrofitting of completed and ongoing piped water supply schemes to provide functional household tap connections and raise the service level. Then it works on grey water management as well. Finally, it works on the capacity building of various stakeholders and support activities to facilitate the implementation of the scheme. With this information, let us know about the service delivery. See the goal of Jaljiven mission is to provide functional household tap connection to every household with service level at the rate of 55 litres per capita per day. So far, we saw the features of the mission. Now, we shall see the institutional mechanism at different levels. See at national level, there is the national Jaljiven mission. At state level, there is state water and sanitation mission. At district level, there is district water and sanitation mission. Then finally, at panjayat level, there are Pani Samithi, village water and sanitation committee user group. That is all about this Jaljiven mission. Now, let us move on to our next article. Take a look at this news article. According to the news article, yesterday Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin have said that state government might move the court against Governor Aaron Ravi for withholding ascent to bills. In this context, let us quickly go through the veto powers of governor. But before that, firstly, we will see what is veto power. It is the power or right vested with one branch of a government to cancel or postpone the decisions or enactments of another branch. In Indian context, it denotes the right of the president or governor to reject bills passed by the legislature. Know that there are three types of veto powers. First one is absolute veto. It means the power to withhold the ascent to the bill. The second one is suspensive veto. It gives the power to return the bill to legislature for reconsideration. The last one is pocket veto. It is the power to not act upon a bill. Now, let us see the veto powers of the governor. In Indian constitution, article 200 and 201 governs the veto powers of governor. Now, let us see about them. When a bill is presented to governor for his ascent, four cases are possible. The first case is that he can give his ascent to the bill. After the ascent, the bill becomes an act. The second case is that he can withhold the ascent to the bill. This is absolute veto. The third case is that he can return the bill to state legislature for reconsideration. Here, you should know two things. One is, governor cannot return a money bill. And the other one is, if a bill is passed again by the legislature without any amendments, now governor cannot withhold his ascent. So here, governor enjoys only suspensive veto. The fourth case is that it is important to note that here he cannot withhold his ascent after the bill is passed again by legislature. But he can reserve the bill for the consideration of president. This is as per article 201 of Indian constitution. This is the fourth case. These are the four cases possible while giving ascent to an ordinary bill. This is about the veto powers of governor. Now, let us compare it with president. President's veto powers are governed by article 111. See, with respect to ordinary bills, president has three options. Firstly, the president can give an ascent to the bill. Then, the president can withhold the ascent. That is absolute veto. Or the president can return the bill for reconsideration of the houses. Here, like the governor, president also enjoys only suspensive veto. This is because if the bill is passed again without any amendments by the houses, then president cannot withhold the ascent. Here also, president cannot return a money bill. One important point to note here is that if governor reserves a state money bill for consideration of president, then also president cannot return the state money bill. One more important point to note here is that, let us say, governor has reserved a bill and it is not a money bill. Now, the president is returning the bill for reconsideration of state legislature. And the bill is passed again with or without amendments and sent to president. In this case, president is not bound to give his ascent. That is all regarding the veto powers of governor. With this, let us move on to our next part of discussion. That is, prelims practice questions discussion. Now, let us take up our first question. Five countries are given and we have to choose which among them are part of Five Eye Alliance. The Five Eye Alliance is an intelligence sharing partnership among five countries, the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. The alliance was originally formed during the post World War II era to enhance the cooperation and intelligence sharing among these countries. India is not a part of it. So, the correct answer here is option C, four only. Now, let us move on to our next question. Here, five countries are given and we have to find which of the above mentioned countries share their border with Gulf of Oman. Here, the correct answer is option D, only four. Among these five countries, Saudi Arabia does not share its border with Gulf of Oman. But Iran, Oman, United Arab Emirates and Pakistan share their border with Gulf of Oman. Now, let us move on to our next question. In this question, three statements are given and we have to find which of the statements are correct regarding the Jal Jeevan mission. The first statement says that it aims to provide piped drinking water to all rural households by 2024. Yes, this statement is correct. The second statement says it aims to provide 25 liters of tap water per person per day to all households by 2024. This statement is incorrect. Jal Jeevan mission aims to provide 55 liters of tap water per person per day to all households by 2024. Hence, statement two is wrong. The third statement says that Goa has become the first Harjul state to provide 100% household tap connections in rural area. Yes, this statement is also correct. Goa is the first state to provide 100% household tap connections in rural areas. And take a note that Jal Shakti ministry is the nodal ministry for the implementation of the scheme. So, the correct answer for this question is option B, only two. And this is your quiz question. Think well and post the correct answer in the comment section. This is your main practice question for the day. Interested aspirants can write the answers and post them in comment section as well. With this, we have come to end of our discussion. You can share your thoughts in comment section. And if you found this video useful, hit the like button. Do share it with fellow aspirants. And don't forget to subscribe Shankar IS Academy's YouTube channel for more UPSC related content. Thanks for listening patiently. Have a nice day.


On these these excerpts from the dialogues the three dialogues given to us by Barclay He's asking the question Or he's trying to answer the questioners to say are there material objects or is there a material substance? now Just to be clear He thinks that there are trees around me sure if you were out here say yeah there are trees around you there be trees and grass and and Rocks and everything else. He's not doing Descartes Descartes is going to say you know at least in the first meditation you don't know that there's anything around you You can't know that Barclay says yeah, you know that there are trees and that there's grass and the sky and bugs and animals And everything else you know that However None of us material None of it has a material substance So in this dialogue, you know, we have the two characters Phelanus and Hylis Phelanus in case you haven't figured out it's basically Barclay Barclay's voice box and Hylis is kind of the counterpoint to Phelanus Now before you dismiss this conclusion too fast, you know take a minute to listen to his reasoning Because he's he's you know once again. He's not saying that there's nothing around me No, he takes seriously the idea that there are things around you And seriously the idea that you can know that there are things around you In fact, it's one of things that both Phelanus and Hylis agree on really quickly is if your theory of what exists or your theory of knowledge Reduces the skepticism to claim that there's nothing around you. That's a bad theory So Barclay is not doing that Barclay saying no, there's very definitely things around you Just none of its material Another reason why he says this It's because he takes very seriously an idea which you probably give at least some credence and The idea is that if you can't see it It doesn't exist so the first thing that Hylis and Phelanus have to do is Set up a distinction between sensation and object, okay Now sensation is simply the act of the mind perceiving. So I'm looking around me and I see greens I see blue the sky. I see some browns from the trunks, right? So I see greens blues Browns I smell the air. It's humid and it's warm The ground is rough. It's solid. These are all the sensations that I have Now the object is the the thing that's perceived. Okay, so looking around me and this is where Hylis and Phelanus agree, right? Phelanus is not going for skepticism. He says no, I do know the things around me. So the objects of sensation are the trees You know the the grass the leaves the rocks the sky the breeze the air all of that are the our objects now You know just to reiterate they agree on the distinction Now the question isn't whether We have whether we perceive the objects around us, right? The question the question isn't that the question is What are the objects that we perceive? So the next distinction that Barclay makes is the distinction between an idea and a notion Now an idea is what's immediately perceived in the mind In a notion it is not a notion You might Better think of notion as suspicion. We might say suspicion these days. That's supposed to notion So the idea is is this so I'm looking around me now and I have lots of ideas I have lots of ideas of trees and grass and sky or that's immediately perceived. That's right here right in front of me It's in my consciousness, right? It's it's it's right there All right, I see the trees and I see I Even see that trail right there. I see that trail. I have an idea of the trail Now I have an idea of the trail But I don't know what put it there, right? I don't know what made the trail now I have lots of notions. I have suspicions. All right, maybe it was volunteers volunteers made the trail Maybe it was animals animals made the trail. Maybe it was city workers, right? Maybe nobody made it at all. Maybe this is just the way the water flowed down the hillside. Those are all notions None of those are immediately perceived in the mind. Not a single one of them, right? so an idea is what I have immediately would I immediately perceive in my mind and Barclays pushing on this said look the ideas are what you know, right? That's your knowledge is What's immediately perceived in the mind? Notions are not. I don't know that city workers made this. I don't know the volunteers made this I don't know the animals or water or whether it just happened I don't know any of those because none of that's immediately perceived those are all related to My ideas right so I have an idea of the path and have the curvature of the path and and the trees I have ideas of all of that But I only have notions only his suspicions as to what made that so its ideas contrasted to notions and For Barclays ideas are where it's at ideas Or is your knowledge so this brings us to material substance or materialist substratum So this is what Highless thinks and what we think you typically what we think exists, too So we look around us and we perceive green and brown and the sky and everything else Now green and brought a green and brown and blue and warm and rough Right. These are all modes. A mode is a way a thing can exist Let's say that again a mode is a way a thing can exist or even quality somebody said qualities are like are pretty much like modes So this is a way that this material substance here exists. It exists Rough and exists brown And I can peel off the bark in a certain way and that's the kind of fibrous it So these are modes to this thing. It's tall You you can't see how tall this is but it's a bit taller than I am Uh, it's saw saw the leaf in the ground, right? I can't I can move a little bit But I can't move it too much right these are all modes for this material substance and what a material substance is Is what supports the modes? The material substance is here and it's supporting in some way the brown The rigid that sound the rough The material substance is not itself those modes Right. It's not identical to those modes But it is instead what supports the modes So now both High list and fill in this are going to say yeah, this is a tree And high list is going to say what this tree is as a material substance That exists in particular kinds of ways Now this is kind of specific language But you know, we tend to do the same thing, right? We talk about this tree It's being a material thing and it has properties or has a chemical composition or Here we try to give it some kind of description of physics and that's fine Right. High list is going to say yeah, those are modes Right. It's chemical composition. That's a mode It's uh You know properties physical properties in terms of being rigid And uh that you know being a plant right that those are all modes Okay So this is what high list says There's a material substance here Now it's not the modes that you see there's a material substance underneath it There's a material substance supporting it Supporting holding those modes in place Uh, but the material substance is not itself those modes All right, so we have Our different definitions, okay now Kind of the rough version maybe like a first approach in understanding what fill in this is going to say is that um Now when the first objection the fill in this brings it gets high list is this and say look You know you you and I both agree. We look at this tree And we say uh, there's a tree here And we both agree That we perceive Extension right that just means that's physical dimensions. We perceive its length. That's width. It's depth. We perceive brown and rough That sound we perceive all of that. We don't just agree about that that much we agree on Now what fill in this says is that much Is what I have is of what I have an idea I immediately perceive That brown that net that sound there, okay the extension. I perceive all of that That's the only way I know that Right is through perception Okay So fill in this says of that much I have an idea now To get to material substance We have to say there's something underneath it There's something underneath it And this is where uh high list has distinction between modes and the material substance, right Both high list and fill in this agreed they perceive the modes all right And then fill in this pushes high list on this say yeah, you perceive the modes But you say the material substance is what supports the modes Right the mode is the modes are extension brown and rough But the material substance is none of those right. It's what perceives the modes It's because it's what supports the modes Okay Well, then you don't have an idea of material substance because that's not immediately in your mind You have to suppose that it's there you have to Have some kind of suspicion that is there And this is where we get you know where uh fill in this is really pushing on the distinction between an idea and a notion And at this point high list is like, oh, wow, you're right. You know, there's There's uh, I say there's a material substance there, but so far I just have a notion Now fill in this is going to take one step further and say look Yeah, you have a notion of it, but even the notion isn't going to work So the next move that fill in this makes is really pushing on this distinction between material substance and mode material substance and mode so Here's what uh fill in this is going to do fill in this is going to take how to say look, you know here we we perceive the trees And they're at different extensions right different depths and then there's the hill behind all of it The hill is furthest back and that's that's the furthest thing that that's the thing that's furthest back we perceive And we both agree that we perceive extension. We both have an idea of extension That extension is immediately present in our minds Okay, so this much high both high list and fill in this agree Now a fill in this is going to push on high list some more say look, um If you say that there's also material substance right then the claim is is we have this extension here Which we perceive and that's an idea And then you say there's a material substance supporting the extension so Here's a question Is the material substance extended? Now it might look like he's just kind of repeating himself, but but his point is this that look I perceive the extension There's the extension. That's it right there Now is the material substance Underneath all of it doing that To a tie list says yes. Yes, there's material substance underneath all of it. Okay, so then we have the extension And then we have the material substance beneath it But then the material substance is now extended again So I have the extension already. That's the mode Now I have the material substance to say it's also extended, but that's another mode So then I have extension under extension okay Well, then Same question. Is that material substance extended? Well, then we say yes, right? We say we'll try it. We'll say yes It you know it has an extension underneath it. So then we have the extension the mode which is Which is on top of another extension which is on top of another extension which is on top of the substance That underlies all of it But that's impossible or you know at the very least Weir because now we have this is set up for this infinite regress of extension all the way down. We never reach substance And that's at best weird if not impossible now. What's highly supposed to say that matter is not extended That seems bizarre So a fill in this concludes from this is look we have A deep problem here with this idea of material substance You're not going to say material substance isn't extended But you're also not going to agree to this infinite regress of Uh extension Now Already, you know, you've already agreed that you're feeling this is talking about highly So you've already agreed that the material substance substratum is not an idea. It's at best a notion But now this notion is starting to result in deep deep confusions so Why should we accept this notion? It's final argument that filliness provides It's kind of a generalization Of the last argument dealing with extension so What filliness and highlights both agree on is that when I perceive these modes when I perceive green and blue And and all of that. Well, that's in my mind right, that's in my mind And high list uh takes the further step and says, yeah, that's in my mind Uh, and there's something out there which is somehow supporting These modes there's that material substance out there supporting the modes. Okay, so If I'm if I if an object has this has these modes has color and extension And sound and taste and and all this it has these modes High list says if it has these modes, then there's something That's supporting these modes when I both Or at least filliness kind of pushes high list to to see this. Well, if there's something supporting these modes If there's something the supporting extension supporting color supporting sound supporting all of this Then whatever that is the material substance whatever it is. It's not those modes It has another color nor figure nor extension. It has no sight. No taste. No smell. No hearing nothing like that so looking at this you know looking at this Metal rail here, right? We high list is saying there is something underneath all of this But since all of this are are modes It itself is not any of those modes So material substance has no color has no extension has no sound no taste nor smell Well, if it doesn't have any of this You and I in Philanus are just kind of looking our house at this point say so you're saying there's something there which has no qualities Well, that thing doesn't exist There's nothing there if it has no qualities if it has no modes at all It's it doesn't exist all right Well, if it doesn't exist and there's not something supporting all of These modes the modes just exist, right? That's what that's what the thing is are the modes Not what's supporting the modes Well, so this kind of wraps this kind of leads very quickly to um Philanus is reductio is you know High list wants to say that this there's something that's supporting the modes and then that there is not something that's supporting the modes I mean, that's what follows from his reasoning so in the end if we say if we start out with the assumption that If I perceive an object with these modes, then there's something supporting the modes We reached the conclusion that it's false that I perceive an object with these modes and there's something I'm saying if i'm perceiving these objects, then there's something supporting the modes Well, then all we're left with is I perceive These modes I perceive the object that is color That is sound That is extension that is taste that is touch all these perceptions That's what I perceive and that's what it is There's no material substance beneath it


I'm here with two of the most exciting young players in the National Football League. Richon, talk to me a little bit here. Your versatility, watch where you're lined up here, and tell me what's going through your mind as far as when you're lined up on the line of scrims.  I see the auto corner of my eye. I see the jet coming. I'm like, shit, I'm just going to make a move and try to see if I can penetrate it. And, you know, obviously he kind of did the work for me, and I was able to get down on it. I love the pre-snap awareness that's outstanding, two of the most versatile inside line buggers in the National Football League right here for many years to come. Very valuable for a defensive coordinator. Now what we're doing right here, talk to me a little bit here about what's going on, Jay, on with your alignment on this two-man stack. All right, so right now we've got a zero blitz, and our check is to get Richon into the blitz, and I'll take his responsibility with the coverage. So Richon is reminding me of that right now, and then I see we're in the goal line, so I want to get my heels no deeper than a white line, and then just be ready to play really good technique. You guys communicate very well with one another. Talk to me a little bit about Richon. Now you're coming, you're timing on this blitz and the b-gap. Yeah, so right now, Jay and I are communicating, Jay and I are doing coverage. I'm the one now doing the Baker blitz. Since the back is split out, so right now I'm basically telling the D-line, I look, I'm bakery, going in that b-gap and trying to create some type of, you know, disruption back there in that backfield. Very nice. Jay, talk to me about just your positioning on the hip. And what I loved about this, you shot your glove hand. You didn't panic. You waited right to the end. This is tremendous coverage by a linebacker. Oh yeah, no doubt we saw the running backs in the tight end split out in this position before on film and just knowing the stack alignment that he can have a two-way go to play inside or outside. So let's D-B press and I'll play it off and just wait it patiently. And fortunately, these guys kind of ran into each other a little bit and messed up their timing and just made a really good break on the ball. All right, let's talk about this huge, huge goal line play. Talk to me right here, Richon. Tell me your keys. I'm looking at what your trigger point is right here, which is very, very valuable. So right now, Richon, I know I got the A gap. I see the back basically kind of like going far type formation almost, but it's gun there.  And people don't understand how quick this has to happen. How all this has to quickly go through your mind because this is a critical junction in this football game. This is going to be a coverage aspect for you, Jay on right here. As you see, you're in coverage. You're dropping off in the slot. Tell me when you know the trigger, when the pass breaks down and the quarterback starts to improvise. So right here, we're in one of our mini cover one coverages and we got, we got two rat players outside and soon as Matt Ryan right here just got outside the tackle box and tried to scramble, you know, I had to trigger and make a good play to get us off the field and forth down. And this is a huge fourth down play to play linebacker in this league. You've got to be decisive. You've got to trust what you're seeing, pre-snap and post-snap, but you also have to have the ability to pull that trigger and have confidence in yourself. I really have loved watching the development of you two guys. As I said, two of the best young inside linebackers in this league, Jayon Brown, Rashon Evans. Thanks for being here guys. Thank you. Thanks for having me. It's very cool. Very cool. Thank you.


Commander 788 here, and it's been a while since we've done one of these quick shots. So let's take a look at the 1984 self-propelled cannon, the Slugger, and the action figure that came with it, Thunder.  It has, of course, a huge cannon that can elevate. It does not rotate. It has a hatch that can swing open and closed.  It has an engine cover that is hinged, which is really nice so you don't lose it. Then it has this scoop in the back here, which can be extended, and that is used to brace against the awesome power of the cannon. And then you can push that back in for when you're driving it around.  Looks really good, and the action figure that comes with it looks pretty good too. Thunder has some pretty amazing accessories. This helmet assembly is actually three separate parts. Then of course it comes with this range finder that fits around his neck. Now I always liked the look of this figure. Nice colors. I think this is a really nice looking action figure. And there's something kind of special about the Slugger. It has something that most vehicles of the era did not have. It has paint. It has a painted on camouflage pattern. And that's very rare. Most vehicles did not come with that. There is a later version of the Slugger that does not have the paint camouflage. There's a later mail away version. That version is considered pretty rare. This is the more common version, the retail version. And this is really nice. I think this looks really good. But for some reason this vehicle was sort of forgotten in GI Joe media. It did show up in the cartoon from time to time, but it was barely used in the GI Joe comic book. And I'm not sure why because this is a very nice looking vehicle. But that's just a quick look at it for now. I hope you enjoyed it. And keep an eye on this channel for more full vintage GI Joe toy reviews. Thanks for watching this and I'll see you next time.


We turn now to a sweeping climate change declaration issued by the world's leading Islamic scholars, calling on the world's 1.6 billion Muslims to do their part to eliminate dangerous greenhouse gas emissions and turn towards renewable energy sources. The declaration urges world leaders meeting in Paris later this year to commit to a 100% zero-emission strategy and to invest in decentralized renewable energy in order to reduce poverty and the catastrophic impacts of climate change. The declaration comes on the heels of the publication of Pope Francis' Encyclical on the Environment earlier this year, which also calls for sweeping action on climate change. Like the Encyclical, this declaration, endorsed by more than 60 leading Islamic scholars, links climate change to the economic system, stating, quote, �We recognize the corruption that humans have caused on the Earth due to our relentless pursuit of economic growth and consumption. It places special emphasis on richer countries and communities, noting that the risks of climate change are, quote, �unevenly distributed� and are generally greater for the poor and disadvantaged communities of every country at all levels of development.� To talk more about the significance of this declaration, we go to London to speak with Salim al-Haq, one of the contributors and signatories to the Islamic Declaration on Global Climate Change, a climate scientist at the International Institute for Environment and Development in London, and director of the International Center for Climate Change and Development in Bangladesh. Salim al-Haq, welcome back to Democracy Now! Talk about what prompted the declaration, who wrote it, and who were the major signatories on it. I think the origin of this came some few months ago, when the Climate Action Network, a group of climate activists, got together with the Islamic Relief Worldwide, a humanitarian Islamic organization that does quite a lot of work with vulnerable communities around the world. And they agreed that this was something that they should take up and got in touch with Islamic scholars and leading clergy around the world, and started drafting a potential declaration of this kind. And then they held a two-day symposium in Istanbul, which ended just a day or so ago, where they brought about 60 international scholars, Muslim scholars, leading clergy from different countries, and invited me as a climate scientist to join them, also Muslim as well. And we honed the final declaration, which came out and has been released. And it's aimed very much at the 1.6 billion Muslims around the world, bringing to their attention the verses of the Holy Qur'an, which enjoin Muslims everywhere to preserve the environment, as stewards of the environment, and at the same time not cause harm to other people by their own pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. And so, at a personal level, to reduce our emissions and at a global level, to join efforts by all faiths in all countries to bring down the fossil fuel use to zero as soon as possible. Well, last month, Democratic presidential candidate Martin O'Malley made headlines by suggesting that the rise of the so-called Islamic State came about in part because of the effects of climate change. He was speaking on Bloomberg TV. Things have preceded the failure of the nation's state of Syria and the rise of ISIS. What's the effect of climate change and the megadrout that affected that region, wiped out farmers, drove people to cities, created a humanitarian crisis that created the symptoms, or rather the conditions of extreme poverty that has led now to the rise of ISIS and the extreme violence. Dr. Sadeem-ul-Haq, your response, I mean, to what extent do you think the conflicts in Syria, Iraq, et cetera, Yemen, are exacerbated by climate change? Can the creation of ISIS really be attributed to the effects of a changing climate? I think there's—I don't think there's a direct attribution of the rise of ISIS as an organization to climate change, but there is no denying the underlying logic of the statement that we just heard, which is that there was a continuing drought for quite a few years in Syria that predates the conflict, the civil war and the rise of ISIS, and caused migration and refugees going from the rural areas to urban areas. And that's the kind of thing that climate change is likely to cause in future and almost certainly will cause future conflicts. And Dr. Haq, what does the declaration call on some of the Muslim majority oil-producing countries to do? They're the ones with among the least incentives to cut down on fossil fuels since they're dependent on them for their economy. Well, first of all, it enjoins all the Muslims in those countries as individuals to do what they can to release their own carbon footprints and also to help their fellow Muslims, who very often are amongst the most vulnerable people to the impacts of climate change, people like Muslims living in Pakistan, in Bangladesh, my country, and in parts of Africa. Many of these are Muslims who are suffering the consequences. And therefore, those of us who are better off have a duty to help them, protect them and to stop causing the pollution that is causing the impacts on them. And at the same time, hope to influence the leaders of these countries that it's in their own best interest to move away from fossil fuels in the long run. And indeed, this is beginning to happen. If you look at the leaders of Abu Dhabi, for example, they are investing heavily in solar energy and in renewable energy because they know that their oil is not going to last forever. Suley Mohawk, we want to thank you for being with us. One of the contributors and signatories to the Islamic Declaration on Global Climate Change, Climate Scientist at the International Institute for Environment and Development in London, director of the International Center for Climate Change and Development in Bangladesh.