Brenda Fitzgerald, the director of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, resigned from her role at the agency this week.
Fitzgerald's departure was announced by the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services in a statement on Wednesday morning, citing financial conflicts of interest.
"Dr. Fitzgerald owns certain complex financial interests that have imposed a broad recusal limiting her ability to complete all of her duties as the CDC Director. Due to the nature of these financial interests, Dr. Fitzgerald could not divest from them in a definitive time period," HHS spokesperson Matt Lloyd wrote in the statement statement.
On Tuesday, Politico reported that Fitzgerald had traded tobacco stock, including shares in an international tobacco giant Japan Tobacco, after assuming the lead role at the public health agency in July.
What a good idea for the person in charge of helping to protect Americans from preventable disease to attempt to benefit financially by purchasing stock in companies whose product causes the death of millions of people a year.
Seriously, what a great message that sends.
Is ANYBODY that Trump puts in charge of these agencies, actually qualified to be in charge of these agencies?
Okay sorry, I realize that is a stupid question.
"Drain the swamp"
ReplyDelete"I do not think it means what you think it means"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2SkInigo Montoya
Rachel Maddow last night - Ben Carson gave no bid lucrative government contracts to his son and daughter in law's companies - even after trump installed ethics folks told him in writing NOT to.
ReplyDeleteThe only things any trump appointee is qualified to do is stealing from American people, lining their own pockets, lying, and some even treason.
We need a stronger expression than, "The mind boggles."
DeleteWanna bet she was about to say smoking doesn’t cause cancer or death, with some sort of Christian bullshit as the excuse.
ReplyDeleteIt's not enough to murder satire, now they've gone and killed comic opera too.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.politicususa.com/2018/01/31/robert-mueller-just-nailed-hope-hicks-obstruction-justice-now-turn-trump.html
ReplyDeleteWhy wouldn’t the doc think this was OK? The President is in the White House to enrich himself and his family. Same for Ben Carson.
ReplyDelete?what other 'stock' does she own? "“The more good guys you get armed in our schools I believe the safer our children,” Schultz opined. “If we could expand this further I would.”
ReplyDeleteThe committee passed the bill unanimously with bipartisan support."
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/02/gun-lobbyist-bizarrely-claims-guns-dangerous-unload-taking-school-will-lead-accident/
"A limited exception to Iowa’s law making it a felony to carry firearms onto school property has cleared an initial hurdle at the statehouse, with the backing of the Iowa Firearms Coalition.
Under the bill, a gun owner with a permit to carry can remain armed while driving onto school property for the sole purpose of transporting a student, but without entering the school building.
We have 300,000 Iowans with a permit to carry weapons. -Richard Rogers, Iowa Firearms Coalition
The bill cleared a three-member bipartisan panel and will now be considered by the full Senate Judiciary Committee.
Coalition lobbyist Richard Rogers says it’s common for a gun owner with a permit to go about a typical day carrying a weapon, and then be called on an errand to the school.
“Say a person wasn't planning to pick up their kids but their spouse calls and says I need you to pick up Johnny and Sally and take them to the dentist,” Rogers said at a hearing on the bill. “He drives up on the property, pulls up on the U drive, sees his kids there, picks them up, he’s committed a felony.”
Under current law, to avoid the charge, the gunowner must pull over, unload the weapon, and store it in the trunk before driving onto school property. Then he must reverse the process after leaving the
If we could expand this further I would. -Rep. Jason Schultz (R-Schleswig)
schoolgrounds.
“That manipulation of the weapon multiplied many times through the year ultimately will lead to an accident,” Rogers said.
At a hearing, representatives of the Iowa Association of School Boards and the Iowa Interfaith Alliance spoke against the bill.
“We just don’t see that this as necessary, and we see this increasing our risk,” said IASB lobbyist Emily Piper.
“Why in today’s world, with all of the school shootings that we’ve had, with all of the shootings in other public venues, but particularly schools, why is the safety of our children not the primary thing that we’re looking at?” asked Interfaith Alliance spokeswoman Connie Ryan.
We see this increasing our risk. -Emily Piper, Iowa Association of School Boards
But Sen. Jason Schultz (R-Schleswig) said Iowans with weapons permits are the good guys, and allowing them onto schoolgrounds will make kids safer.
“The more good guys you get armed in our schools I believe the safer our children,” Schultz said. “If we could expand this further I would.”
The activist group Everytown for Gun Safety is monitoring the bill.
Rogers said the bill is a “necessary change” now that more and more Iowans have permits to carry weapons.
“Back in the day when we had 25-30,000 Iowans who had a permit to carry weapons it probably wasn't that much of an issue that it was a felony to carry onto school grounds, even if only in your vehicle and for a moment,” Rogers said. “But now we have nearly 300,000 Iowans with a permit to carry weapons.”"
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/01/obamacare-repeal-republican-status-381470
ReplyDeletehttps://thinkprogress.org/extreme-abortion-ban-defeated-in-the-senate-d4025c4d542a/
senate voted NO but...
ABORTION IS THE ISSUE
OT?
ReplyDeletehttps://bnanews.bna.com/daily-labor-report/labor-dept-ditches-data-on-worker-tips-retained-by-businesses
"Senior department political officials—faced with a government analysis showing that workers could lose billions of dollars in tips as a result of the proposal—ordered staff to revise the data methodology to lessen the expected impact, several of the sources said. Although later calculations showed progressively reduced tip losses, Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta and his team are said to have still been uncomfortable with including the data in the proposal. The officials disagreed with assumptions in the analysis that employers would retain their employees’ gratuities, rather than redistribute the money to other hourly workers. They wound up receiving approval from the White House to publish a proposal Dec. 5 that removed the economic transfer data altogether, the sources said.
The move to drop the analysis means workers, businesses, advocacy groups, and others who want to weigh in on the tip pool proposal will have to do so without seeing the government’s estimate first. The public notice-and-comment period for the proposal is set to end Feb. 5.
The new revelation lends credence to concerns from Democrats and labor organizers that the proposed rule will short change workers. "