From
the bustling streets of Philadelphia to the rural farmlands of Mercer
County, nearly every community in Pennsylvania has been rocked by the
opioid crisis – and the problem keeps worsening.
In 2016, more than 4,600 Pennsylvanians died as a result of drug abuse. It has affected the lives of thousands more.
Jose
Benitez, the executive director of a needle exchange clinic in
Philadelphia, struggles to make sure he has enough manpower and
resources to treat his growing number of patients. He said three years
ago, he treated 4,000 patients. Now, he serves about 15,000, most of
whom are battling opioid-related addictions.
“We have mothers, fathers, sister, brothers dying daily,” he said. “It has to stop.”
For
Benitez, additional funding and attention to the opioid crisis is a
tipping point in the Pennsylvania midterm election. He hopes to see
lawmakers who are educated on addiction and can provide innovative
solutions.
Additional funding and attention to the opioid crisis is seen as a
tipping point for some voters in the Pennsylvania midterm election.
They have said they hope to see lawmakers who are educated on addiction
and can provide innovative solutions.
(This content is subject to copyright.)
“What
we’ve done so far isn’t working,” Benitez said. “In Kensington
[Philadelphia], we have more than 600 homeless people, most of them
addicted to opioids. It’s a real public health issue and it’s
devastating our communities.”
The opioid problem is emerging as a
major issue during the midterm elections, particularly in areas hard hit
by the growing crisis.
“This is an issue that voters on the
ground care about,” said Jeanne Zaino, a political science professor at
Iona College in New Rochelle, N.Y. “Look at the Wisconsin Senate race,
for example, where healthcare has been a major issue leading up to the
midterm.” A recent analysis by the Wall Street Journal
shows that ads mentioning the opioid crisis have aired more than 50,000
times in congressional and gubernatorial races across 25 states. Just
four years ago, at around this time, it had only been mentioned 70
times, the Journal reported.
The Wisconsin Senate race is one of
several where candidates have feuded over how to address the opioid
epidemic. Democrats in the state have hammered away at Republican
candidate Leah Vukmir's legislative health care record, claiming she
sides with insurance companies and businesses over ordinary
Wisconsinites. Republicans say a government-run system will not only
divert treatment but decrease the quality of care for everyone.
It
is also a major problem in Pennsylvania’s largest county, Philadelphia,
where more than 1,217 drug-related deaths were reported last year.
The
Democratic candidate for Congress in Lehigh Valley, Susan Wild, wants
to focus on medical care – not criminal prosecutions. Her Republican
opponent, Marty Nothstein, thinks the focus should be on public safety.
Nothstein believes beefed up border security will help cut off the
influx of what he calls replacement drugs – like fentanyl and heroin –
that have contributed to fatalities both regionally and nationally.
In
northeast Pennsylvania, the opioid crisis has become a political focal
point. Incumbent Rep. Tom Marino, R-Cogan Station, was nearly named
America's drug czar, under the Trump administration, but withdrew his
name after he was accused of weakening laws that favored the
pharmaceutical industry.
Marino, a former federal prosecutor, has
called the allegations a “hatchet job.” Nonetheless, has been
criticized by his Democratic opponent, Marc Friedenberg, who claims
Marino is too cozy with drug companies to make a real dent on the opioid
crisis.
“Throughout my campaign, this crisis has been one of the most common issues that voters want to talk about,” Friedenberg said in a recent statement.
“We need real solutions; we don’t need politicians like Tom Marino who
are more interested in cashing checks from Big Pharma than they are in
helping Pennsylvanians.”
Friedenberg held an “opioid town hall”
last month. This past summer, Marino also held a town hall focusing on
the opioid crisis that was co-hosted by celebrity Dr. Phil.
Marino
has defended his record, saying as a prosecutor he has dedicated his
life to “aggressive and faithful enforcement” of the nation’s laws.
“Given
my lifelong devotion to law enforcement, I insist on correcting the
record regarding the false accusations and unfair reporting to which I
have been subjected," Marino said when the allegations first arose.
The opioid problem is emerging as a major issue during the midterm
elections, particularly in areas hard hit by the growing crisis.
Zaino believes the current drug crisis can become the
deciding factor in many toss-up races in the northeast. Combating the
opioid epidemic is a shared viewpoint, Zaino said, essentially no one
opposes it – but candidates do differ on how to address the issue.
“When
you remove healthcare coverage from the conversation, the likelihood of
someone accessing treatment significantly decreases,” said Democratic
Strategist Roger Fisk. “So, Republicans are really at odds with
themselves on this issue. You can’t fight the epidemic and cancel
coverage at the time.”
Republicans, on the other hand, would like
to see a shared effort between the private and public sector as well as
emphasizing law enforcement’s role in cutting off the flow of illicit
drugs.
“This issue is about making America strong again, the
community along with lawmakers have to forge an alliance and work
together to repair our communities,” said Republican strategist Chris
Prudhome.
Despite the differences, the topic has remained a
priority for lawmakers. Last week, Congress approved a rare bipartisan
bill to combat the growing health crisis – creating, expanding and
reauthorizing drug programs and policies across almost every federal
agency.
The bill was sent to the White House just in time for lawmakers to campaign on the issue before the November midterm elections.
“It
will be interesting to see how voters in the Northeast, where there are
Republicans and Democrats running on this issue with two different
viewpoints, vote,” said Zaino, “I think only the exit polls will tell us
what Americans want to see happen next.”
The left is really, really angry after the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation.
Or
perhaps I should say that some liberal pundits are mad as hell. And
that's leading them to make some stunning declarations as they try to
harness that anger—or maybe just engage in very public group therapy.
Now
anger has always been a tool in American politics. It's a way of
whipping up your base and energizing your voters. President Trump
regularly tries to rouse his most loyal supporters by playing to their
grievances and hitting hot-button cultural issues. (Just yesterday, he
accused Democrats of "torturing" Kavanaugh and his family through a
"hoax" with "fabricated" charges.)
But there was a dramatically
different reaction in the left-leaning media establishment when anger on
the right began fueling the Tea Party movement after Barack Obama's
election. I never particularly liked the "take back our country"
rhetoric — take it back from what? — but many mainstream pundits were
too quick to dismiss the movement as a bunch of racist yahoos.
Now, in the Trump era, anger is in. It's trending. There's a resistance movement.
There
was, to be sure, plenty of ugliness on both sides of the Supreme Court
battle. Ariel Dumas, a writer for Stephen Colbert’s "Late Show," tweeted
that "no matter what happens, I'm just glad we ruined Brett Kavanaugh's
life." (She later expressed regret for her "tone-deaf attempt at
sarcasm," but I don't see a hint of humor.)
Anyone flipping through the major papers yesterday would have seen these op-ed headlines:
"Liberals, This Is War" — Charles Blow, New York Times.
"Get Angry, and Get Involved" — David Leonhardt, New York Times.
"We Need to Stay Angry on Kavanaugh" — E.J. Dionne, Washington Post.
I'm sensing a pattern here. Let's start with Blow,
who's already written that he wants to hate Donald Trump. The Kavanaugh
confirmation, he says, is part "of a much larger plan by conservatives
to fundamentally change the American political structure so that it
enshrines and protects white male power even after America's changing
demographics and mores move away from that power."
Blow writes
that "liberals can get so high-minded that they lose sight of the ground
war," and in case folks aren't grabbing their bayonets, says that
"Kavanaugh is only one soldier, albeit an important one, in a larger
battle. Stop thinking you're in a skirmish, when you're at war." Leonhardt begins his piece with this declaration: "If you're not angry yet, you should be."
Leaving
aside that people don't like to be told how they should feel, he says
that after a "brutal, partisan process ... the two new justices have
cemented an extremist Republican majority on the Supreme Court. It has
already begun acting as a kind of super-legislature, throwing out laws
on voting rights, worker rights, consumer rights and political influence
buying. Now, the court is poised to do much more to benefit the wealthy
and powerful at the expense of most Americans — and the planet. This is
not how democracy is supposed to work."
Actually, it's exactly how democracy is supposed to work.
Trump
won the election (by fewer popular votes, Leonhardt complains, but
that's the system set up by the Constitution). The Senate confirmed his
choice (yes, on a razor-thin partisan vote, but that’s also how
ObamaCare passed).
"Again, if you’re not angry, you should be, and
I realize that many of you already are. The past two weeks, on top of
everything that came before, have created a sense of frustration and
injustice that I have never seen before from people on the left and in
the center. The question now is, What are you going to do with that
anger?"
Then he makes the perfectly rational suggestion that they
get involved: Turn out in the midterms, prod family and friends, knock
on doors. That, too, is how democracy is supposed to work. If you want
your side to wield power, you have to win elections.
Dionne is a
smart and sophisticated observer, and an old colleague, so I'm surprised
by the language he uses: "Conservative forces in the country, led by
the Republican Party, have completed a judicial coup, decades in the
making."
A coup? I get that conservatives have been targeting the
court for decades, and I get that the GOP was ruthless in denying
Merrick Garland a vote. But that doesn't rise to even metaphorical coup
status.
"After all these outrages, there will be calls for a
renewal of civility, as if the problem is that people said nasty things
about one other. But the answer to this power grab cannot be passive
acceptance in the name of being polite."
Then comes the zinger: E.J. wants to pack the court.
"And
there should now be no squeamishness about the urgency of enlarging the
Supreme Court if Democrats have the power to do so after the 2020
elections. The current majority on the court was created through
illegitimate means. Changing that majority would not constitute
politicizing the court because conservatives have already done this
without apology."
Sure, he acknowledges that FDR’s court-packing
scheme was a disaster, but says the opposition can be overcome with a
two-year debate.
Doesn't this sound like changing the rules after losing the game?
The
country has just been through a raw and incendiary battle that opened
wounds about the treatment of alleged sexual assault. Emotions are still
running high. But all this talk of anger and wars and coups seems
jarringly out of place for those who usually preach the virtues of
rational debate and discourse.
Comedian Kathy Griffin on Monday threw in her support behind a writer for CBS’ "The Late Show with Stephen Colbert" who ignited controversy over a tweet that said, "Whatever happens, I'm just glad we ruined Brett Kavanaugh's life."
Ariel Dumas' tweet came shortly after news broke that the embattled judge would be confirmed as the next Supreme Court Justice.
Ariel Dumas is a writer for The Late Show with Stephen Colbert.
(Twitter)
Dumas posted the tweet as the
Senate confirmed Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court by a 50-48
vote. The nomination was marked by a bitter fight between Democrats and
Republicans after a California psychology professor alleged Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her in the early 1980s.
Dumas later deleted the tweet and apologized for the post after it was met with backlash.
Dumas
wrote that “the complexity of frustration, anger and sadness can’t be
accurately conveyed on twitter, and I regret my tone-deaf attempt at
sarcasm in the wake of it.”
Reached for further comment by Fox
News, CBS said Dumas' apology spoke for itself. The network confirmed
that Dumas currently works for Colbert's show.
“@ArielDumas, a
comedy writer, being held to a higher standard than the President of the
United States. Love you @ArielDumas, f**k the haters,” Griffin
tweeted.
The 57-year-old comedian has tried to establish herself
as one of President Donald Trump's most outspoken critics. In May 2017,
Griffin unleashed a storm of controversy after posing with a blooded replica of Trump's head in a photoshot. The stunt derailed Griffin's career for nearly a year.
In reaction to Kavanaugh's confirmation on Saturday, Griffin tweeted: "What a terrible day in American history."
Speaking at a swearing-in ceremony for Associate Supreme Court
Justice Brett Kavanaugh in the East Room of the White House Monday
evening, President Trump apologized to Kavanaugh and his family "on
behalf of our nation" for what he called a desperate Democrat-led
campaign of "lies and deception" intent on derailing his confirmation.
"On
behalf of our nation, I want to apologize to Brett and the entire
Kavanaugh family for the terrible pain and suffering you have been
forced to endure," Trump began. "Those who step forward to serve our
country deserve a fair and dignified evaluation, not a campaign of
political and personal destruction based on lies and deception. What
happened to the Kavanaugh family violates every notion of fairness,
decency, and due process. In our country, a man or a woman must always
be presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty."
Trump added that "under historic scrutiny," Kavanaugh had been "proven innocent." A series of uncorroborated and disputed sexual misconduct allegations had threatened to upend Kavanaugh's confirmation, and some top Democrats have floated further investigations and even possibly impeaching Kavanaugh.
To
sustained, raucous applause, Trump entered the event Monday night
flanked by Kavanaugh and former Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, who
hired Kavanaugh as a law clerk from 1993 to 1994. All sitting Supreme
Court justices were in attendance, as well as Kavanaugh's parents, wife,
and two daughters.
"You, sir, under historic scrutiny, were proven innocent." — President Trump to Brett Kavanaugh
Trump thanked
top Republicans for spearheading Kavanaugh's confirmation, and
particularly praised Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins. Kavanaugh's
elevation to the Supreme Court appeared certain only after Collins delivered a dramatic, point-by-point explanation of
her vote for Kavanaugh in a floor speech on Friday afternoon. "We are
indebted to Susan Collins for her brave and eloquent speech," Trump
said.
The president also led a standing ovation for Senate
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., whom he called a "great" leader
who has done an "incredible job for the American people." Under
McConnell, Republicans have now confirmed 26 federal appellate judges
and two Supreme Court justices. (Kavanaugh's rise to the Supreme Court
creates a new vacancy on the influential D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals,
where he had served for 12 years.) SUSAN COLLINS CRITICIZES ANTI-KAVANAUGH ACTIVISTS FOR 'TRYING TO BUY VOTES'
At
the conclusion of Trump's remarks, Kennedy administered the oath to
Kavanaugh as his family looked on, and the room again broke out into
sustained applause. As Trump noted, it was the first time a Supreme
Court justice has ever sworn in his former clerk to take his seat.
Taking
the podium as the Supreme Court's newest justice, Kavanaugh
acknowledged the partisan rancor that surrounded his confirmation and
gripped the nation over the past two months. "I take this office with
gratitude and no bitterness," he said.
"All nine of us revere the
Constitution," Kavanaugh continued, referring to his new colleagues.
"The Supreme Court is an institution of law. It is not a partisan or
political institution. The justices do not sit on opposite sides of the
aisle. ... The Supreme Court is a team of nine, and I will always be a
team player on a team of nine."
At times emotional, Kavanaugh
praised his "amazing" and "fearless" friends for standing by him, and
said that his focus now is "to be the best justice I can be."
"My
goal is to be a great justice, for all Americans, and for all of
America," Kavanaugh said. "I will work very hard to achieve that goal. I
was not appointed to serve one party or one interest, but one nation."
He vowed to continue to "coach, teach, and tutor" -- a notable promise, given that student backlash at Harvard Law School last week prompted Kavanaugh to withdraw from teaching a planned course there.
"I take this office with gratitude and no bitterness." — Associate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh
"I
am an optimist. I live on the sunrise side of the mountain," Kavanaugh
said, echoing a line from his fiery testimony last month before the
Senate Judiciary Committee. "I see the day that is coming, not the day
that has gone." KAVANAUGH, WIFE, ACCUSER ALL RECEIVE GRAPHIC DEATH THREATS
The
Monday evening oath was entirely ceremonial. Kavanaugh took his
official oaths in a private ceremony at the Supreme Court on Saturday,
shortly after the Senate voted to confirm him by a narrow 50-48 margin.
The
event, a high-spirited flourish after a historically bitter and
partisan confirmation battle, was a nationally televised opportunity for
Kavanaugh to speak directly to the nation that is increasingly divided
along partisan lines. Fox News polls show that GOP enthusiasm is up across the board in the wake of the Kavanaugh showdown, even though political headwinds normally work against the party of incumbent presidents in their first midterm elections.
Kavanaugh,
along with his law clerks, has been at the Supreme Court preparing for
his first day on the bench Tuesday. The high court is set to hear
arguments in two cases about longer prison terms for repeat offenders.
(Kavanaugh's four clerks all are women, the first time that has
happened.) WATCH: WHAT'S AHEAD FOR KAVANAUGH'S FIRST SUPREME COURT TERM?
However,
the upcoming Supreme Court term is "fairly benign when it comes to
hot-button issues," Adam Feldman, a Supreme Court expert who runs the blog Empirical SCOTUS,
told Fox News. "This makes me think that the justices were aware of
[Justice Anthony] Kennedy's likely departure when they starting granting
cases for this term."
On Saturday, Chief Justice John Roberts
administered Kavanaugh's constitutional oath and Kennedy administered
his judicial oath. Protesters outside banged on the Supreme Court's
doors, with some trying to fight their way inside. Capitol Hill police,
assisting U.S. Supreme Court police, have arrested hundreds of
anti-Kavanaugh protesters in recent days. VICE PRESIDENT PENCE FACES PROTESTERS INSTEAD OF USING SIDE EXIT AT CAPITOL, TELLS SECURITY DETAIL, 'LET'S DO IT'
The
new justice was "caught up in a hoax that was set up by the Democrats,"
Trump said as he left the White House earlier Monday for a quick trip
to Florida. "It was all made up, it was fabricated and it's a disgrace."
"We stood up to the mob." — Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.
The climactic 50-48 roll call vote Saturday on Kavanaugh was the closest vote to confirm a justice since 1881.
Collins, the Maine moderate Trump thanked in his opening remarks Monday, revealed on Sunday that she initially thought Kavanaugh "perhaps needed to withdraw" after she heard Christine Blasey Ford's "very compelling and painful" testimony.
But
then, Collins said, "When [Kavanaugh] came back with a forceful
denial, the anger and anguish he showed, and then the lack of
corroboration, led me back to the fundamental issues to our legal
system."
On Sunday, Collins criticized opponents' efforts to
fundraise against her vote, calling them nothing more than blatant ploys
to buy votes in a future election.
“They are asking me to perform
an official act and if I do not do what they want, $2 million plus is
going to go to my opponent. I think that if our politics has come to the
point where people are trying to buy votes and buy positions, then we
are in a very sad place,” Collins told CBS News' "60 Minutes." DEMS WAGE WAR ON KAVANAUGH: WILL IMPEACHMENT THREATS GO ANYWHERE?
Ultimately,
every Democrat voted against Kavanaugh except for Sen. Joe Manchin of
West Virginia, a deeply red state where Kavanaugh remains highly
popular. Manchin is up for re-election this year.
McConnell on
Sunday praised his fellow GOP senators, who he said re-established the
"presumption of innocence" in confirmation hearings.
"We stood up to the mob," he added.