Like Countable?

Install the App
TRY NOW

The DC: 🥓Imposing a tax on red meat, and... ⚕️ Are firearm deaths a public health concern?

by Countable | 11.14.18

Welcome to Wednesday, electorate...

California's Camp Fire has reached a grim milestone: the deadliest fire in state history.

President Trump called the wildfires burning up and down the state "devastating" and "the likes of which we've never seen before."

"We mourn the lives of those lost, and we pray for the victims, and there are more victims than anybody would ever even think possible," Trump said during a ceremony marking Diwali, the Hindu festival of lights.

The Camp Fire alone is being blamed for 42 deaths, and the number is expected to rise as more than 200 people remain unaccounted for.

What - if anything - should Congress do? Contact your reps here.

On the Radar

  • Last week, the National Rifle Association (NRA) criticized physicians’ research on gun injuries and deaths, tweeting that “self-important anti-gun doctors” should “stay in their lane.” The NRA was responding to the American College of Physicians’ new position paper, in which the group outlines its public health approach to reducing deaths and injuries from firearms. The NRA posted its tweet just hours before a man shot and killed 12 people in California. Are gun deaths a public health problem?

  • Gerrymandering continues to garner headlines, there are ongoing accusations that restrictive voting policies affected the 2018 midterms, and Florida and Georgia are still counting ballots a week after Election Day. Florida's recount inspired Trump to tweet - without evidence - that “many ballots are missing or forged.” A federal judge in the Sunshine State told both sides to “ramp down the rhetoric." Regardless of the outcome of the outstanding elections, Democrats will take control of the House in January and one of the first items topping their legislative to-do list is removing obstacles to voting. Is it time for a new Voting Rights Act?

Under the Radar

  • Countless studies have found a link between meat consumption and increased risk of heart disease, cancer, stroke, and diabetes—is it time to impose a “meat tax”? According to a new study, a global “meat tax” could save 220,000 lives and cut health care costs by $41 billion, annually. The study, and proposals for a levy, come after the World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer declared that cured, smoked, and other processed meats (including beef, lamb, and pork) cause cancer. WHO found the same was “probably” true for unprocessed red meat like steak and burgers. Should the U.S. impose "meat taxes"?

Your Gov at a Glance 👀

The White House: President Trump in D.C.

  • To be announced.

The House of Representatives: In

The Senate: In

What You're Saying

Here's how you're answering Should a Program Helping North African Countries Fight Terrorism Be Permanent?

(Follow Alex's comment here.)

(Follow Kwessan's comment here.)

But wait, there's more!

And, in the End…

In honor of Congress’s return from the midterm recess and politicians’ penchant for the pithy bill acronyms, we’ve put together another tournament in which you — Countable users — will choose the best bill acronym of the 115th Congress.

Countable’s selection committee has chosen 16 of the most creatively, and in some cases spitefully, titled pieces of legislation this Congress has introduced.

The winner of this round will be the champion, and you’ll be able to vote for your favorite through Thursday at midnight PT.

Click here to vote on either the Rescuing Animals with Rewards (RAWR) Act or Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies (BEZOS) Act.

Happy Diwali to our Hindu Take Actioners,

—Josh Herman

Talk to Managing Editor Andrea Seabrook via email, andrea [at] countable.us, or on twitter, @RadioBabe. And don’t forget to keep in touch @Countable.

Countable

Written by Countable

Leave a comment
(50)