MINSK/MOSCOW (Reuters) – The leaders of Russia and Belarus agreed on Saturday that the problems in Belarus would be resolved soon, the Kremlin said, as tens of thousands took to the streets in Minsk once again to urge President Alexander Lukashenko to quit.
Accused of rigging last Sunday’s election, Lukashenko had earlier issued an appeal to Russian President Vladimir Putin as the Belarus leader grapples with the biggest challenge to his 26-year rule and the threat of new Western sanctions.
Ties between the two traditional allies had been under strain before the election, as Russia scaled back the subsidies that propped up Lukashenko’s government. Russia sees Belarus as a strategic buffer against NATO and the EU.
Statements by both sides contained a pointed reference to a “union state” between the two countries. Lukashenko has previously rejected calls by Moscow for closer economic and political ties as an assault on his country’s sovereignty.
“Both sides expressed confidence that all the problems that have arisen will be resolved soon,” a Kremlin statement said after Lukashenko and Putin spoke by phone.
“These problems should not be exploited by destructive forces seeking to harm the mutually beneficial cooperation between the two countries within the framework of the union state,” it added.
The European Union is gearing up to impose new sanctions on Belarus in response to a violent crackdown in which at least two protesters have been killed and thousands detained.
On a visit to neighbouring Poland, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said Washington was monitoring the situation closely. The leaders of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania called on Belarus to conduct new “free and fair” elections.
Lukashenko said he did not need foreign governments or mediators to solve the situation in Belarus, state news agency Belta reported.
“We will not give the country away to anyone,” he said.
Tens of thousands took to the streets of the Belarusian capital on Saturday. Crowds gathered to lay flowers where one of the protesters was killed this week, waving flags and chanting “go away” and “Lukashenko is a murderer”.
‘OUTSIDE MEDDLING’
Lukashenko has accused the protesters of being criminals and in cahoots with foreign backers. Ahead of his call with Putin on Saturday, he suggested that the impact of the protests might spill beyond Belarus’s borders.
Moscow this week also accused unnamed countries of “outside meddling” in Belarus.
“There is a need to contact Putin so that I can talk to him now, because it is not a threat to just Belarus anymore,” Lukashenko said, according to the Belta news agency.
“Defending Belarus today is no less than defending our entire space, the union state … Those who roam the streets, most of them do not understand this.”
Opposition presidential candidate Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, who fled to neighbouring Lithuania on Tuesday, has called for more protests and an election recount.
Her campaign announced she was starting to form a national council to facilitate the transfer of power.
Lukashenko on Friday warned Belarusians to stay at home to avoid becoming “cannon fodder”.
Russia has been wary of unrest on its borders since governments fell in Georgia’s 2003 Rose Revolution, Ukraine’s 2003-04 Orange Revolution and Kyiv’s 2014 Maidan protests – events in which it says the West backed the protesters.
Lukashenko, a 65-year-old who once ran a Soviet collective farm, has faced increasing anger over his handling of the coronavirus pandemic as well as a sluggish economy and civil rights.
The official election result handed him a landslide victory with 80% of the vote, compared to around 10% for Tsikhanouskaya. Washington said the vote “was not free and fair”.
“Former president of #Belarus now asks Putin for help. Against whom? Against own people carrying flowers on the streets?” Lithuania’s Foreign Minister Linas Linkevicius tweeted.
Reporting by Polina Devitt and Darya Korsunskaya in Moscow; Andrius Sytas in Vilnius and Ilya Zhegulev in Kyiv; writing by Matthias Williams; editing by John Stonestreet and Giles Elgood
Last week, the Defense Department announced that remains recovered there last year have been identified as those of Sgt. George R. Reeser, 25, of Washington, Ill. He will be buried next month outside Deer Creek, Ill., where his parents, Levi and Esther, rest.
Fox News Flash top headlines are here. Check out what’s clicking on Foxnews.com.
Despite the best-friend bond Joe Biden touts with former President Obama, tensions have lingered between the two statesmen over their vastly different governing styles, according to a Politico report.
To start, a number of anonymously sourced quotes from Obama leaked out throughout the 2020 Biden campaign where the former president allegedly expressed doubts about his former running mates’ fitness for office.
“Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to f–k things up,” one Democrat who spoke to the former president recalled him saying.
When lamenting his own diminishing relationship with the current Democratic electorate, particularly in Iowa, Obama reportedly told one 2020 candidate: “And you know who really doesn’t have it? Joe Biden.”
Some Biden aides pointed out that, when Obama’s endorsement of Biden in 2020 finally did arrive, it didn’t have nearly the energy of his endorsement of Hillary Clinton in 2016.
“I don’t think there’s ever been someone so qualified to hold this office,” Obama said of Clinton in 2016 in an endorsement video. “I believe Joe has all of the qualities we need in a president right now … and I know he will surround himself with good people,” Obama said in Biden’s endorsement video.
And while some senior Democrats credited Biden’s ties to Obama for his strong relationship with Black voters, Biden has emphasized that he earned their votes all on his own. He told aides after his South Carolina primary win Obama hadn’t “lifted a finger” to help him.
Going back to 2016 when Obama glossed over Biden for Clinton when he expressed interest in a presidential run, Obama aides tried to frame the president’s snub as an act of compassion: Biden– grieving the loss of his son Beau in 2015 — would not be mentally equipped to handle a campaign.
“But numerous administration veterans, including loyalists to both Obama and Biden, remember it differently: Obama had begun embracing Clinton as a possible successor years before Biden lost his son, while the vice president was laying the groundwork for his own campaign,” the Politico report read.
Obama “had been subtly weighing in against,” Biden himself recalled in Promise Me, Dad, his 2017 book.
“I also believe he had concluded that Hillary Clinton was almost certain to be the nominee, which was good by him,” Biden wrote.
But many credit their differences in leadership style for any perceived tension. Biden loyalists and some Republicans found the formal, scholarly statesman Obama had a hard time connecting with those in Congress.
“Negotiating with President Obama was all about the fact that he felt that he knew the world better than you,” said Eric Cantor, the Republican House majority leader from 2011 to 2014. “And he felt that he thought about it so much, that he figured it all out, and no matter what conclusion you had come to with the same set of facts, his way was right.” Biden, he said, understood that “you’re gonna have to agree to disagree about some things.”
A former Republican leadership described Obama’s style as “mansplaining, basically.”
Meanwhile, Obama’s camp reportedly rolled their eyes at the plainspoken, gaffe-prone Biden.
“You could certainly see technocratic eye-rolling at times,” said Jen Psaki, the former White House communications director.
White House aides reportedly mocked Biden’s frequent slipups and lack of discipline next to “almost clerical” Obama.
Svetlana Tikhanovskaya, candidate for Belarus’ presidential election, smiles as she speaks to people during a meeting in her support in Brest, Belarus, on Aug. 2.
Sergei Grits/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Sergei Grits/AP
Svetlana Tikhanovskaya, candidate for Belarus’ presidential election, smiles as she speaks to people during a meeting in her support in Brest, Belarus, on Aug. 2.
Sergei Grits/AP
Belarus’ scattered and improvised opposition is regaining its footing after five-term President Alexander Lukashenko unleashed his security forces on protesters during four nights of unprecedented violence.
Svetlana Tikhanovskaya, the main opposition candidate in Sunday’s election, resurfaced on social media Friday after the authorities pressured her to leave for neighboring Lithuania earlier this week. Tikhanovskaya, a political novice, ran against Lukashenko after her husband was denied registration as a candidate and jailed.
“I admire Belarusians. Thank you, my dear ones!” she said in a statement posted online. “We did the impossible. We showed that we’re the majority, and that this country belongs to us, the people of Belarus, and not one person.”
Tikhanovskaya said she is ready to enter talks with the government under the auspices of international partners. She appealed to law enforcement officers and military personnel to stay true to their oaths to serve the Belarusian people. And she expressed her condolences to those who had suffered at the hands of the police.
Outrage over the nocturnal violence brought primarily women out during the day, many wearing white and carrying flowers. Factory workers across the country then walked off the job. In a separate video message, Tikhanovskaya urged people to keep up their peaceful protest over the weekend.
Tikhanovskaya said she was forming a “coordination council” that would help secure a peaceful transfer of power.
Her initiative echoed an earlier call for a “national salvation front” by her political ally Valery Tsepkalo, a former diplomat and IT entrepreneur who, like Tikhanovskaya’s husband Sergei Tikhanovsky, was barred from running for president.
Valery Tsepkalo, an opposition politician from Belarus and former ambassador to the United States, speaks during an interview with the Associated Press near Red Square in Moscow, on July 28, with St. Basil’s Cathedral in the background.
Alexander Zemlianichenko/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Alexander Zemlianichenko/AP
Valery Tsepkalo, an opposition politician from Belarus and former ambassador to the United States, speaks during an interview with the Associated Press near Red Square in Moscow, on July 28, with St. Basil’s Cathedral in the background.
Alexander Zemlianichenko/AP
“The national salvation front is a big movement that would include everybody, all different political parties who share the same goal: to release political prisoners and to have free and fair presidential elections,” Tsepkalo told NPR in an interview.
After the departure of Lukashenko from office, he said, the national salvation front would set up a caretaker government of technocrats until a new president can be elected.
Tikhanovskaya campaigned on the promise of serving as a transitional leader who would be in office only long enough to hold new elections with the participation of all opposition candidates, such as her husband, Tsepkalo or Viktor Babariko, another presidential hopeful now in pretrial detention on fraud charges.
Tsepkalo served as Lukashenko’s ambassador to the U.S. from 1997 to 2002, before diplomatic relations between the two countries deteriorated. Inspired by the success of Silicon Valley, Tsepkalo helped set up the Belarus Hi-Tech Park when he returned to Minsk. He said the last time he met Lukashenko was more than a decade ago to discuss the tech park.
Lukashenko has ruled Belarus since 1994, almost its entire period of independence from the Soviet Union. The Kremlin views Belarus as a buffer state between Russia and NATO members Poland, Lithuania and Latvia — and has subsidized the regime in Minsk with cheap energy deliveries. Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has a testy relationship with Lukashenko, has recently cut discounts on oil and gas as a way of pressuring Belarus into closer political and economic integration.
Putin congratulated Lukashenko on Monday, right after Chinese President Xi Jinping. In a statement, Putin said that he looked forward to greater economic, political and military cooperation with Belarus.
“We are very disappointed by the fact that Putin congratulated Lukashenko on the results of the presidential campaign, which appeared to be completely false,” Tsepkalo said. “It was a kind of a betrayal from the side of the Russian government.”
The threat of Russian aggression against Belarus is a recurring theme among pundits that Lukashenko plays on himself. In late July, Belarusian security forces arrested 33 Russian citizens as Lukashenko darkly warned of foreign puppet-masters seeking to foment unrest in Belarus after the election. On Friday, he handed all but one of them — who has dual citizenship — back to Russia.
Tsepkalo said he believes a Russian military intervention is unlikely. “I do not see that it might happen,” he said. “But if it would happen, it would be a disaster for Belarus and for European security.”
In 2014, Putin annexed Crimea and fomented an armed insurgency in eastern Ukraine after that country’s Kremlin-backed president, Viktor Yanukovych, fled to Russia following a street revolution in Kyiv. Ukraine’s new government pledged to take Ukraine into NATO and the European Union.
Belarusians are more positively inclined toward Russia, and candidates like Tikhanovskaya are pro-Western in the sense that they want open, democratic societies — but not that they’re seeking NATO or EU membership.
Lukashenko has tried to use Belarus’ uncomfortable geography to his advantage, flirting with the West to ward off Putin’s embrace. In February, Lukashenko received Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and now is expecting the arrival of the first U.S. ambassador in more than a decade.
“The United States should not recognize Lukashenko as a legitimate leader,” Tsepkalo said. “The United States, I wish, would recognize Svetlana Tikhanovskaya as the winner of these presidential elections.”
If the U.S. and EU accept his claim to the presidency, Lukashenko would lose his motivation to negotiate a transfer of power with the opposition, Tsepkalo said.
Pompeo, who was traveling in Europe this week, condemned the violence, and said the U.S. would work with European allies to come up with an “appropriate response.”
Tsepkalo said he will travel to Poland next week, and that he’ll go to Washington if he succeeds in organizing congressional hearings on Belarus.
President Trump on Friday again blamed Democrats for holding up the next round of federal coronavirus relief, suggesting that he’s ready to sign off on crucial aid provisions while top Democrats have dug in their heels. That’s not exactly the whole story.
Donald Trump speaks during a briefing at the White House, August 13, 2020.
Getty Images
KEY FACTS
Trump tweeted that he has directed Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin to prepare to send more stimulus checks.
He also said that he’s ready to direct the Small Business Association and Treasury Department to send more funding to small businesses, and that he’s ready to send more aid to state and local governments.
Top Democrats met with the Trump Administration daily for nearly two weeks to hash out the next bill, but a self-imposed deadline passed last Friday without an agreement.
The main point of contention between the two sides—the GOP was so mired in internal disagreements that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) didn’t even attend the meetings—was the bill’s price tag.
In May, Democrats passed a sweeping $3.4 trillion package, but the White House wants a targeted $1 trillion bill; Democrats have said they’re willing to shave $1 trillion off their ask if the Administration will come up $1 trillion (an offer Mnuchin dismissed as a “non-starter”).
In a joint statement with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Wednesday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) accused the White House of being unwilling to adjust its position on the size and scope of the bill, while Democrats have “repeatedly” compromised.
What to watch for
The Republican-led Senate—which must approve all of the provisions Trump mentioned if they are to require more federal spending—left town on Thursday for its August recess and won’t return until after Labor Day. If a deal is reached before then, however, the Senate could be called back in for a vote.
Key background
This isn’t the first time Trump has excoriated Democrats for holding up relief efforts this week. On Thursday, he said that the stalled negotiations were the result of Democrats’ insistence on funds for mail-in voting, which he claims (without evidence) would lead to widespread voter fraud. “It’s their fault,” he said Thursday on Fox Business after he was asked why Democrats and the White House were still “miles apart” on any stimulus deal. “They want $3.5 billion for something that will turn out to be fraudulent, that’s election money basically.”
Mr. Koizumi told reporters on Saturday that his ministry would send a team of specialists to investigate the damage in Mauritius. According to the news agency Reuters, he described the oil spill as a grave crisis that could lead to a loss of biodiversity.
Mr. Abe, who has recently dialed back his public appearances, sent a ritual offering of cash to Yasukuni on Saturday, as well as flowers to be laid at a cemetery near the shrine.
In a speech at a Tokyo ceremony commemorating the end of the war, Mr. Abe said: “Under the flag of proactive pacifism, by holding hands with the international community, we are determined to play a role more than ever to resolve various challenges.”
Emperor Naruhito, appearing with his wife, Empress Masako, also addressed the ceremony, expressing “feelings of deep remorse” for the war.
In using those words, he continued a tradition begun by his father, Akihito, who abdicated last year. Akihito added that phrase to his annual remarks in 2015, after Mr. Abe pushed through legislation that opened the door to letting the Japanese military fight in foreign conflicts.
Hisako Ueno contributed reporting from Tokyo and Choe Sang-Hun from Seoul, South Korea.
Sign up: Want to understand what’s happening in the campaign? Sign up for The Trailer and get insights and news from across the country in your inbox three days a week.
The poll, released Thursday, shows Biden leading Trump among registered voters 53 percent to 45 percent.
The poll found a nearly identical percentage of people who said they will definitely vote for Trump or Biden in the November.
Among Biden supporters, 84 percent said they will definitely support him in the fall while 85 percent of Trump voters said they would for sure back him.
Still, the Pew survey echoed findings from other recent polls that showed Trump with more enthusiastic support among his base than Biden has among his.
Sixty-six percent of Trump supporters in the Pew poll said they “strongly support” him while 46 percent of Biden voters said the same of the presumptive Democratic nominee.
Half of voters surveyed in the poll also said they think it will be very or somewhat easy to vote in the upcoming elections, while 49 percent expect to have difficulties casting a ballot.
That’s a significant increase in those concerned about having difficulty voting this year amid the coronavirus pandemic, as more officials emphasize the necessity of mail-in voting.
In 2018, 85 percent of respondents said it would be easy for them to vote.
Among Trump supporters, 80 percent said that they prefer to vote in person. By contrast, 58 percent of Biden supporters said they prefer to vote by mail.
The Pew survey collected responses from 11,001 people between July 27 and Aug. 2 and reported a margin of error of 1.5 percentage points.
But action on that may not happen until September, when Congress also has to address appropriations for fiscal year 2021, which begins in October. A delay on that would prompt a partial government shutdown.
“I cannot imagine any way in which Republicans or Democrats want to have a government shutdown a month out from the election,” Hoagland said.
The stimulus aid could get taken up in a continuing resolution, he said.
Meanwhile, Americans who are counting on more financial help will have to wait, Hoagland said. That’s as Trump’s executive order did little to prevent evictions and details of how the new extended unemployment benefits will be paid on a federal and state level is still getting sorted out.
“I think there’s going to be some people that are going to be hurting between now and September,” Hoagland said. “Come Labor Day, there’s going to be a lot of angry people.”
If Congress signs off on the stimulus checks in September, Americans may have to wait until October or later to receive the money.
“Politically, some of the people in the White House might think it’s a good thing to get a check signed by Donald Trump right before the election,” Hoagland said.
This time around, deploying millions of $1,200 payments will likely be easier for the IRS, which means people could receive the funds more quickly, said Kris Cox, senior tax policy analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
“Despite decades of funding cuts, the IRS impressively got stimulus payments out the door within weeks of the CARES legislation passing,” Cox said. “We expect the IRS is anticipating a second round and they’re ready and equipped to get money out the door quickly.”
But that depends on lawmakers coming back to the negotiating table and agreeing, she said.
Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf testifies last week during a hearing before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
Alex Wong/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Alex Wong/Getty Images
Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf testifies last week during a hearing before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
Alex Wong/Getty Images
Updated at 4:47 p.m. ET
The Government Accountability Office says that the acting leaders of the Department of Homeland Security, who have been serving in their roles without Senate confirmation, were not appointed through a valid process.
Since November, Chad Wolf has been acting secretary of DHS and Ken Cuccinelli the senior official performing the duties of deputy secretary.
Neither of those appointments is legitimate, the GAO found, because they depended on the actions of an earlier official who himself was improperly placed in charge of the department due to an error in paperwork.
The opinion could prompt judges to dismiss some DHS actions as illegal, and it also suggests it is not clear who has the legal authority to run the department.
“We are referring the question as to who should be serving as the Acting Secretary and the Senior Official Performing the Duties of Deputy Secretary to the DHS Office of Inspector General for its review,” Thomas H. Armstrong, general counsel for the GAO, wrote.
A DHS spokesman told NPR, “We wholeheartedly disagree with the GAO’s baseless report and plan to issue a formal response to this shortly.”
The Trump administration has relied heavily on temporary appointments rather than permanently filling key posts. President Trump has said he prefers acting appointments for the speed and flexibility they offer. Because they do not require Senate confirmation, such postings bypass a layer of legislative oversight over the executive branch.
But even for the Trump administration, the lack of permanent leadership at the Department of Homeland Security has been unusual.
“Next Friday is the 500th day that we have not had a Senate-confirmed secretary of homeland security,” said Steve Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas. “That’s a record for a Cabinet vacancy.”
The last Senate-confirmed secretary, Kirstjen Nielsen, resigned in 2019.
NPR reported last fall that Trump wanted Cuccinelli, an immigration hard-liner, to be secretary, but worried the Senate would not confirm him. So instead the president has relied on acting leaders, including Cuccinelli’s role as acting deputy.
But the GAO said the acting assignments have been invalid since Nielsen’s departure. Nielsen tried to change the rules governing temporary appointments to ensure that Trump’s preferred choice, Kevin McAleenan, would lead the department after her. But, the GAO found, she bungled the paperwork. (Technically, she amended the annexes to an executive order, instead of amending the executive order.)
McAleenan did not have a valid appointment to his role, so when he changed the rules of succession to pave Wolf’s path to the acting post, it lacked legitimacy, and when Wolf appointed Cuccinelli it wasn’t valid, either.
“The big question is, so what?” asked Anne Joseph O’Connell, a law professor at Stanford University.
She noted the GAO’s opinion is not binding on DHS or on the court system.
However, under the leadership of Wolf and Cuccinelli, the Department of Homeland Security has attracted intense scrutiny for such actions as deploying federal agents to protests in Portland, Ore., over the opposition of local and state leaders. And new restrictions on asylum-seekers and Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, applicants have prompted lawsuits from immigration advocates.
Some of those lawsuits seek to throw out DHS actions on the grounds that the department’s leadership is not legitimately in power. And now a government body has endorsed that legal argument, which, O’Connell said, “could be very persuasive in the courts.”
As a result, some of Wolf’s and Cuccinelli’s actions could be undone in court rulings.
The GAO said its review only focused on the legality of the appointments — and not on what it means for actions taken by DHS officials. That matter is being referred to another government watchdog for review.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday struck down California’s ban on high-capacity magazines on the basis that its restrictions violate the Second Amendment — noting that it would criminalize half the magazines in the U.S.
The state’s law bans possession of large-capacity magazines (LCMs) that hold more than 10 rounds. The court’s three-judge panel said that while the law has a “laudable goal of reducing gun violence,” it must also comply with the Constitution.
“California’s near-categorical ban of LCMs infringes on the fundamental right to self-defense. It criminalizes the possession of half of all magazines in America today,” the majority in the 2-1 ruling stated.
“It makes unlawful magazines that are commonly used in handguns by law abiding citizens for self-defense. And it substantially burdens the core right of self-defense guaranteed to the people under the Second Amendment,” Judge Kenneth Lee wrote in the majority opinion. “It cannot stand.”
Lee said that while the law was passed “in the wake of heart-wrenching and highly publicized mass shootings” the law was too sweeping.
It upholds a 2017 ruling by San Diego-based U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez, who blocked a new law that would have barred gun owners from possessing magazines holding more than 10 bullets.
But he and the appeals court went further by declaring unconstitutional a state law that had prohibited buying or selling such magazines since 2000. That law had let those who had the magazines before then keep them, but barred new sales or imports.
California now has the option of asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review the decision. It may also seek a delay on implementation of the decision to prevent a surge in purchases
The ruling may also have implications for other states that have similar laws — although it only applies to Western states due to the court’s jurisdiction.
Gun rights groups have been keen to get such a case before the Supreme Court, where there is currently a conservative majority.
“America doesn’t respect anything but money. What our people need is a few millionaires.”
Those are words attributed to Madam CJ Walker, the country’s first self-made female millionaire and a titan in entrepreneurial history. When putting together a list of iconic American women who helped shape the United States, it seems impossible not to acknowledge Walker.
And yet, she does not appear on our Women of the Century national or state lists. The parameters set included being alive between 1920 and 2020. Walker died of kidney failure at age 51 in 1919, which means she barely missed the cut.
Still, as public submissions flooded in, our audience wanted to make sure we understood the power of Walker. A wide range of journalists – men and women from a variety of backgrounds across USA TODAY Network newsrooms – asked us to make an exception even before the Netflix series about her premiered in March.
Born Sarah Breedlove, Walker was determined to create opportunities for other Black women who had been pushed to the sidelines. The former laundress built her fortune by developing a line of hair care products that she marketed to Black women. But she didn’t do this solely to make a profit. She invited women who looked like her to join her and helped them create income. She recognized her power, and urged other Black women to recognize theirs, too.
Tyrone Freeman, an assistant professor of philanthropic studies at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis whose book on Walker publishes this fall, said that when talking about Walker, one must understand the historical context.
“This is the height of Jim Crow America: Racism and sexism are at full blast, and there’s severe limitations on Black life,” he said. “It’s not just about segregated neighborhoods – it’s a deprivation of resources, with limited economies and limited opportunities for Black people. She comes in and flips that dynamic on its head, and opens up opportunity in communities that are deliberately being discriminated against. That’s a big deal. It was a mark of pride to work for her.”
Walker was deftly attuned to Black economic development. When she built her estate in Irvington, New York, she purposefully hired Black construction workers. She donated significant money to the NAACP and the anti-lynching movement and hosted suffrage meetings. She viewed herself as a “race woman,” Freeman said, dedicating herself to uplifting Black people.
Her influence is still felt today. Walker paved the way for hundreds of other female entrepreneurs. Consider Tyra Banks, who is also missing from our lists. The first African American woman to be on the covers of Sports Illustrated and GQ taught young women everywhere that Black is beautiful and worthy. But she’s more than just one of the highest-paid models in the world – she’s a powerhouse businesswoman, too.
Some women missed the list because they came from more populous states, where narrowing the field to 10 was next to impossible. Martha Stewart was born in New Jersey but lived in New York as she revolutionized the idea of being a homemaker. But with so many innovative and courageous women from the same states, many didn’t make our lists. There are so many women who have been innovators in entertainment like Cher, Madonna and writer and producer Shonda Rhimes, who created shows like “Grey’s Anatomy” and “Scandal” – none of them made our lists, either.
Nominations that came from the public and suggestions from our panelists leaned heavily toward women who have broken barriers in male-dominated fields like sports, politics or science. Fields stereotypically considered “women’s work” like nursing, teaching and cooking are critical to our lives, but we had relatively few nominations in these areas.
Women known for beauty such as model-turned-businesswoman Kathy Ireland or fashion designers Vera Wang and Donna Karan don’t appear. Groundbreaking politicians like Ann Richards, the former governor of Texas, and Geraldine Ferraro, the first female vice-presidential nominee on a major party ticket, are missing. The announcement of Kamala Harris as Joe Biden’s 2020 running mate came after the project was completed.
Some women are younger and we’re only starting to see what they’ll accomplish. We expect to hear a lot more from actresses, writers and producers Mindy Kaling and Issa Rae; soccer star and outspoken LGBTQ activist Megan Rapinoe; Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez; gun control advocate Emma Gonzalez, and others.
It’s impossible to pick a perfect list. What we know for sure is this: For decades, women have been pushed out of the spotlight. Often, they’re content to stay there, concerned more about the greater good than individual glory. Maybe that will change in the next 100 years. Maybe in the next century, there will be no missing women – because they’ll get the recognition they’ve always deserved.
Postmaster General Louis DeJoy is under fire for management changes he has made to the Postal Service that some say could slow the delivery of absentee ballots this fall.
Alex Wong/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Alex Wong/Getty Images
Postmaster General Louis DeJoy is under fire for management changes he has made to the Postal Service that some say could slow the delivery of absentee ballots this fall.
Alex Wong/Getty Images
Election officials are seeking clarification from the Postal Service about how recent cutbacks will affect what’s expected to be an avalanche of mail-in voting in the upcoming election. Changes in postal operations have already led to mail delays across the country, raising alarms about what will happen in November.
NPR has learned that a bipartisan group of secretaries of state, who are responsible for running elections, requested to meet this week with postmaster general, Louis DeJoy, who was appointed to the job in May. But that meeting has yet to be scheduled.
“Unfortunately, [we] still haven’t had a direct conversation with the U.S. postmaster,” New Mexico Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver told NPR Thursday. “Hopefully, we will soon.”
Toulouse Oliver is president of the National Association of Secretaries of State and one of those who requested the meeting.
It was not clear why the invitation has yet to be accepted, but those familiar with the exchange said the delay is unusual, considering that election officials will begin sending out absentee ballots as soon as September.
The secretaries — which included Frank LaRose of Ohio, Jocelyn Benson of Michigan and Kyle Ardoin of Louisiana — said in the letter that they “view the USPS as a vital partner in administering a safe, successful election and would like to learn more about any planned changes around USPS service due to COVID-19, preparations for increased election-related mail, USPS staffing levels and processing times, and other pertinent issues.”
In an email to NPR about the request, the Postal Service responded that it “appreciates its longstanding relationship with the National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS). We have been in touch with NASS and are working to set up a meeting between our Election Mail stakeholders as well as theirs. We continue to work with NASS, all Secretaries of State and Boards of Election and look forward to a successful general election in November.”
DeJoy, a major donor to President Trump and other Republicans, has raised concerns among election officials and lawmakers of both parties by making major changes in the way the U.S Postal Service does business, including banning employees from working overtime and imposing a hiring freeze. He says the service is facing an $11 billion shortfall this year and such changes are needed.
But in his first public statement last week, DeJoy also reaffirmed the Postal Service’s commitment to delivering election mail and said the organization has “ample capacity to deliver all election mail securely and on time.”
President Trump has contradicted that claim, saying repeatedly that the Postal Service will not be able to handle the expected flood of absentee ballots without a large infusion of funds, which he opposes.
“They need that money in order to have the post office work so it can take all of these millions and millions of ballots,” Trump said in a Fox Business Network interview Thursday.
The Postal Service has also raised concerns by sending letters recently to a number of states, including Pennsylvania, warning that current deadlines for requesting and returning absentee ballots make it impossible to guarantee that the ballots will be delivered on time.
Pennsylvania allows voters to request a mail-in ballot as late as Oct. 27, but under current law, it must be returned and received by Nov. 3 to count. The Postal Service has recommended that voters allow at least a week for ballots to be delivered.
These issues make it all the more urgent that the postmaster general meet with the secretaries of state, says David Becker, who runs the nonprofit Center for Election Innovation and Research.
“It’s entirely reasonable that a bipartisan group of election officials would want more information about whether USPS can meet its obligations to serve American voters, particularly only 81 days out from Election Day,” he said. “The fact that the postmaster general is unresponsive to their concerns is unusual, and troubling.”
In the past, election officials have generally worked closely with their local post offices to make sure that ballots get delivered on time. Toulouse Oliver expressed confidence that that relationship would continue.
“I have a lot of faith and trust in our regional and local postmasters and Postal Service employees who, again, reiterate time and time again that election mail is tremendously important to them and to the Postal Service and that they will be, again, treating it as the absolute highest priority over the next few months,” she said.
Right now, state and local election officials are trying to set mail-in voting procedures for November. Officials are advising voters to request their ballots and return them as soon as possible to avoid having their ballots rejected because they arrive too late. Tens of thousands of primary ballots this year were rejected for that reason.
Many states are also setting up secure drop boxes where voters can deposit their ballots to be collected later by election officials and thus don’t need to depend on the post office to deliver them.
“Absentee ballots, by the way, are fine,” Trump told reporters on Thursday. “But the universal mail-ins that are just sent all over the place, where people can grab them and grab stacks of them, and sign them and do whatever you want, that’s the thing we’re against.”
This is a widget area - If you go to "Appearance" in your WP-Admin you can change the content of this box in "Widgets", or you can remove this box completely under "Theme Options"
