Monday, October 20, 2025
spot_img
spot_img
Home Blog Page 375

Public Health Expands Monkeypox Vaccination Eligibility

With the arrival of an additional 9,000 JYNNEOS doses late last week and an additional 7,000 doses arriving later this week, the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health or Public Health is expanding eligibility for the monkeypox vaccine to include additional residents at higher risk of exposure.

Beginning July 20, monkeypox vaccine will be available for gay men, bisexual men, men having sex with men, and transgender persons who:

  • Were diagnosed with gonorrhea or early syphilis within the past 12 months; or
  • Are on HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP); or
  • Attended or worked at a commercial sex venue or other venue where they had anonymous sex or sex with multiple partners (e.g., saunas, bathhouses, sex clubs, sex party) within past 21 days.

Residents who fall under these eligibility requirements can get vaccinated several ways:

  1. Contact their doctor or healthcare provider to find out if they are a monkeypox vaccine provider. If they are a vaccine provider, eligible residents can request an appointment with their provider to get vaccinated. Providers that are registered to administer vaccines may also reach out to patients who are thought to be eligible to invite them to get vaccinated.
  2. Visiting a Public Monkeypox vaccine location with their ID and provide one of the following:
    1. Proof of gonorrhea or early syphilis infection in the last 12 months in the form of a lab report (the proof can be shown from your phone, including a screenshot of the result or within a patient portal; OR
    2. A monkeypox provider attestation form completed by your doctor; OR
  3. Being invited to get vaccinated after receiving a text message with their name from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health.

Residents who meet any of the eligibility criteria can fill out a sign-up form by visiting ph.lacounty.gov/monkeypoxsignup and providing their name, date of birth, and eligibility information to get on a list to receive vaccine if they meet the eligibility criteria and vaccine is available. Residents can also indicate locations that are most convenient for them to get vaccinated.

PV Prices Surge; Beach Plummets

We’ve said for years that land on the Palos Verdes peninsula is undervalued. We may not be able to say that much longer. Last month the properties on the Hill took another big jump upward in median price.

That’s the second time in six months. When that yellow line peaked in February we found several new construction homes closed escrow in the same month boosting the median price dramatically.

This time we found two homes, selling in the same month, at over $10 million. To put that in perspective, during the past 12 months only four properties on the Hill have reached the $10 million mark.

So what are these rarefied houses that bring in over-the-top median prices? Let’s take a closer look.

(Photos at link.)

The listing agent described 2005 Paseo del Mar as a single level with five bedrooms, 4 1/2 baths, formal living and dining rooms, two family rooms, a pool, a four car-garage with gated entry and a circular driveway. So what makes it worth $12.4 million instead of $2 million?

It seems 4,582 square feet of house sitting on over an acre of land on the bluffs above the Pacific Ocean is worth about $10 million more than if it had an inland address.

Similarly, 1417 Lower Paseo la Cresta is a grand estate offering over 15,000 square feet of lavish living space spread over three levels, with nine bedrooms, 13 bathrooms and two full kitchens. Additional highlights include the custom 15-seat theater, Italian Fantini mosaic pool, elevator, generator and an extensive home automation system.

Beach Cities Sales Down -34% From 2021

The Inland cities clearly leap-frogged the other three areas in volume of sales for June. Sales in the Inland area out-paced the rest of South Bay, erasing a -17% decline from May of this year and adding a +13% increase for June.

The next closest monthly sales volume was a +2% at the beach. Harbor Area sales showed the poorest comparable performance, dropping by -4% for the month, continuing a three month slide.

Monthly sales volume in the Harbor Area has declined 135 units just since March.

Let’s focus on the harbor and that red line on the chart for just a moment. Remember this is an entry level market, where a small rise in the mortgage interest rate can quickly price a new buyer out of the running. Notice that sales in the Harbor Area were at about 300 homes per month in January.

By February a few buyers had noticed the interest rates climbing and took the leap. Then March became the proverbial last chance to buy in the fast moving current market. Sales volume shot through the ceiling with a 61% increase in homes sold. Since then, we have watched a classic collapse with prospective buyers melting into the woodwork, waiting for another opportunity.

Annual statistics are still reflecting the impact of two plus years of the pandemic. Compared to June of last year, sales were down dramatically. The Inland area fared the best, coming in with a drop of -6% from 2021. Sales in the Beach cities and the Harbor Area fell the farthest with a -34% and a -29% respectively.

Total Dollars Sold Up 71% In Just Two Years

Back in 2020, the first six months of the year had netted slightly over $3.1 billion in South Bay home sales.

Fast forward to the first six months of 2022 and total sales is slightly over $5.3 billion. Restated, that’s a 71% increase in dollars spent on real estate in just two years.

Much of that increase was the result of the phenomenally low interest rates created by the Federal Reserve Bank (Fed) to offset the financial impact of the pandemic. It was good for all those people who wanted homes and had down payment money. Investors did especially well, though we saw another big expansion of the inequality gap.

Coming out of the pandemic, we’re seeing the four areas moving erratically. The steep climbs of 2020 and 2021 seem to be leveling off, as the Fed tries desperately to slow what is viewed as a runaway real estate market.

Total sales dollars in 2019 were $7.9 billion, in 2020 up to $8.7 billion, and in 2021 up again to $12.1 billion. Since mortgage rates are still climbing, it’s a little early for forecasting, but we anticipate 2022 total sales to come in at about $11.3 billion.

Where Are We Going?

Comparing last year’s market to 2022 shows a continuing decline in sales, while simultaneously a continuing increase in median prices. That may still change before the end of the year.

In May we saw the quantity sold drop into the red numbers across the South Bay. For June the sales volume is only off in the Harbor Area, but the Hill and the beach are both marginal. We expect sales to gradually slow as the year closes. Indications are the Fed will ratchet up the mortgage interest rate another 2% which should bring transaction volume down substantially.

May also saw the median price drop at the harbor. Then in June the median fell for the beach cities and the Inland areas, while the Harbor bounced back. We expect both the median and the sales volume to fall back into the red zone by the end of the year.

Sales volume should move first. Then as sales slow and buyers become more selective, sellers will begin retrenching on price. We don’t anticipate major price reductions until 2023. However, there are a lot of moving parts to this year’s economy. Events on the other side of the world may still make big changes here.

Carl Clark is a Southern California real estate broker (#01181754) with statewide experience in sales and leasing of residential and commercial properties since 1994.

The Big Business Plot to Overthrow Democrats Revealed?

“[T]he monopoly which our manufacturers have obtained against us … like an overgrown standing army, has become formidable to the government, and upon many occasions intimidate the legislature.” — Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations, 1776

There’s lots of speculation about what may be causing today’s terrible inflation to continue to rise. Is it rebound demand from COVID? Too much “quantitative easing” stimulus from the Fed? Chinese botched-COVID supply chain issues? Saudi Arabia withholding oil from world markets? Russia’s terrorist campaign against Ukraine?

Obviously, all are contributing factors. But the price of oil is now below $95 and our economy is on the verge of recession, both major factors that should be cutting inflation. Yet inflation continues, nonetheless, to rise here in the US (9.1% this month) while, Bloomberg reported yesterday, the EU is down to 7.1% inflation and predicting 4% for next year.

How is it possible that the rest of the world is recovering from the COVID/Oil/War inflation bump, but things are getting worse here in the USA?

The one variable nobody seems to be positing — but I’m going to go there — is that it’s political, at least in part.

That is, inflation that started out as a demand/supply-chain rebound from the end of COVID is continuing to rise in America as part of an intentional effort to damage Democratic prospects in this Fall’s election and heading into 2024.

Lest you think I’ve gone totally paranoid, please read on.

Inflation always hurts the party in power. Both Jerry Ford and Jimmy Carter were one-term presidents largely because of inflation, and the 20% inflation after World War II nearly got Harry Truman thrown out of the White House.

When the economy sucks, enough voters swing to “the other guy” to change the nation’s political power dynamics, pretty much regardless of who the other guy is.

As the headline in today’s New York Times reads: “Democrats Face Deepening Peril as Republicans Seize on Inflation Fears.”

Not only does every politician in America know how this political danger works, but so also does the leader of every major corporation. And there’s the rub.

So how did we get here?

Prices in America used to be regulated by something called competition.

If one company raises prices above a reasonable level, another company will offer products at a lower price and take away their customers. As long as there are multiple companies in every market sector, and new businesses can easily enter the marketplace to compete with larger companies that have gotten lazy or greedy, competition regulates prices very efficiently.

What blows this up is when companies get large enough that they can use their size and market dominance to keep competitors out of the marketplace.

John D Rockefeller, for example, used to buy up all the available railroad contracts for shipping oil to prevent smaller competitors from getting their product to market. Once they were in trouble financially, he’d give them “an offer they couldn’t refuse” and buy them out, making his large company even larger.

Andrew Carnegie did this with steel and JP Morgan did it with banking; there were trusts and monopolies in fields as disparate as manufacturing matches, refining and selling sugar, and building railroad cars.

By the late 19th century the situation had become so intolerable that Congress put into place the first anti-trust laws.

Before the Reagan Revolution, those antitrust and anti-monopoly laws — dating all the way back to the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 — were largely enforced and kept big corporations in check.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) was created in 1915 by Democratic President Woodrow Wilson, specifically to break up concentrated business trusts and monopolies, using the Justice Department as its prosecutorial arm. It came into being against a backdrop of public outrage over giant corporations screwing consumers and owning captive politicians.

As President Teddy Roosevelt, the great trust buster, said a decade earlier, “There can be no effective control of corporations while their political activity remains.” Indeed, it took a decade to create the agency that Roosevelt had proposed, as I detail in The Hidden History of Monopolies: How Big Business Destroyed the American Dream.

Probably the FTC’s most well-known effort was breaking up the telephone behemoth AT&T, an action started during the Nixon administration that, when completed in 1982, produced an explosion of competitive activity that dropped phone call costs, increased availability, and spurred the creation of hundreds of new companies in the telecom arena.

Even the Supreme Court, back in the day, agreed that giant corporations dominating markets was bad for the economy and our political system.

In the 1962 antitrust case of Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, for example, the Supreme Court agreed with the FTC and blocked the merger of Brown and G. R. Kinney, two shoe manufacturers, because the combination of the two would have captured about 5% of the US shoe market. For comparison, Nike today has 19% of the US shoe market.

All of that antitrust activity came to an end in 1982 when President Reagan appointed William C. Miller III, his former executive director of the Presidential Task Force on Regulatory Relief, to take over the FTC. Miller was the first pro-corporate leader in the nation’s history to corrupt the agency that was supposed to regulate corporate misbehavior.

That year (as it had been since the 1930s) most of this nation’s business activity was centered in the cash registers of our small- and medium-sized companies. The total value of America’s largest corporations — those listed on stock exchanges — was equal to just 39.4% of the entire nation’s economic activity or GDP in 1981.

Miller, however, declined to continue enforcing our antitrust laws and in 1983 Reagan instructed the DOJ to, essentially, stop prosecuting companies that were violating those laws through mergers and acquisitions, and to only go after the most egregious and flagrant acts of corporate collusion and price-fixing.

As a result, large companies became behemoths, and pretty much every industry in America is today dominated by a small handful of companies that carefully monitor each other to function, essentially, as cartels. When United raises ticket prices by $50, for example, American does the same three hours later.

Which is why today the total value of America’s exchange-listed corporations is 194.9% of GDP, elbowing out most small- and medium-sized companies.

As Jonathan Tepper pointed out in The Myth of Capitalism, fully 90% of the beer that Americans drink is controlled by two companies. Air travel is mostly controlled by four companies, and over half of the nation’s banking is done by five banks.

In multiple states there are only one or two health insurance companies, high-speed internet is in a near-monopoly state virtually everywhere in America (75% of us can “choose” only one company), and three companies control around three-quarters of the entire pesticide and seed markets.

The vast majority of radio and TV stations in the country are owned by a small handful of companies, and the internet is dominated by Google and Facebook.

This has handed enormous power to the CEOs and senior managers of America’s largest companies, all of them multi-multi-millionaires and many billionaires.

These are not people who want to pay more in taxes. Nor do they want unions or to have their industries regulated in any meaningful way; they’d like things to stay the way they’ve been since the Reagan Revolution.

But President Joe Biden has been working with Senator Bernie Sanders (Chair of the powerful Budget Committee) to create a whole plethora of progressive legislation that would raise corporate and billionaire taxes and increase corporate regulation. Not to mention Democrats’ advocacy of those hated unions.

And this fall, if all goes well, Democrats might even expand their control of the House and Senate in the wake of mass shootings and the Supreme Court’s Dobbs abortion ruling, meaning even more aggressive promotion of unions, regulation, and tax increases could be on the horizon.

Is there any doubt in your mind that most of these titans of industry don’t want unions, regulation, and higher taxes? Every president since Reagan, Democratic and Republican, has gone along with this neoliberal deregulation, anti-union, and low-tax scheme.

Big business doesn’t want the Reaganomics gravy train to stop and, so far, they’ve been able to buy enough politicians to keep it that way. Until this unholy alliance of Biden and Sanders.

So, is it really possible that our largest corporations and their leaders are ripping us all off and jacking up inflation on an ongoing basis just to stick it to the Democrats and hand the GOP the reins of power in 2022 and 2024?

If political power was the only thing they got out of it, the answer is “possibly.”

But when you realize that they also get massively larger profits at the same time, and billions of that will flow down to CEO compensation, that twofer raises it to “probably.”

Big business trying to overthrow progressive Democratic leadership of this country is not a new thing.

In the summer of 1933, a group of America’s most powerful industrialists pulled together $300 million ($6.8 billion in today’s dollars) to hire retired Marine General Smedley Butler to lead an army of 500,000 rightwing WWI veterans to capture or kill President Franklin Roosevelt and turn the White House over to a “good Republican.”

As Gillian Brockwell wrote last year for The Washington Post of the “Businessman’s Plot”:

“Its members included J.P. Morgan Jr., Irénée du Pont and the CEOs of General Motors, Birds Eye and General Foods, among others. Together they held near $40 billion in assets, Denton said — about $778 billion today.

“Had Butler been a different sort of person and gone along with the plot, Denton thinks it would have been successful. Instead, in the fall of 1934, he went to J. Edgar Hoover, head of what would become the FBI.”

The republic was saved and businessmen went back to just doing business until the 1980s, when they found their savior in Ronald Reagan. Which brings us to today.

Simply raising prices (and profits) is a hell of a lot less dangerous way to turn Democrats out of office than paying a retired general to kidnap a president. And the risks are negligible, particularly when their wholly-owned Republicans in the Senate will block any efforts to break up their companies or impose windfall profits taxes.

And those giant corporations are raking in the profits. As Barrons reported last month in an article titled Exxon May Be Making ‘More Than God’:

“Exxon Mobil (Ticker: XOM) is expected to generate about $41 billion of net income in 2022, up from $23 billion last year.”

Similarly, Tom Perkins reports for The Guardian:

“The analysis of Securities and Exchange Commission filings for 100 US corporations found net profits up by a median of 49%, and in one case by as much as 111,000%. Those increases came as companies saddled customers with higher prices and all but ten executed massive stock buyback programs or bumped dividends to enrich investors. …

“The Guardian’s findings are in line with recent US commerce department data that shows corporate profits rose 35% during the last year and are at their highest level since 1950.”

The Guardian’s analysis found:

“Chevron’s 240% profit spike was part of ‘the best two quarters the company has ever seen’… Steel Dynamics profits increased 809% … Fertilizer giant Nutrien’s profits shot up by about $1.2bn … [and] Nike’s 53% profit increase driven by higher prices was only ‘partially offset’ by supply chain and inflationary cost increases.”

The article concludes that much of the explosion in corporate profits is made possible by market consolidation: giant companies are no longer subject to the pressures of inflation.

I’d add that there’s a big reward down the road for all those CEOs if they can help America dump the pesky Democrats who want to tax those windfall profits and replace them with Republicans who are again demanding more tax cuts for the morbidly rich.

Last Tuesday, Nobel Prize-winning economist and NY Times columnist Paul Krugman wrote a particularly fascinating op-ed wondering out loud why the economic data for the United States doesn’t make sense any more. If the economy is in trouble, so should be American companies; if the economy is doing well, so should the American consumers.

But the companies are doing great while consumers are getting screwed.

“Let’s talk about the numbers, and how they don’t add up,” Krugman noted.

He then laid out the numbers, showing that while inflation is raging, wages are actually declining, among other paradoxes.

“Are you confused?” Krugman writes. “You should be. I’ve been in this business a long time, and I can’t remember any period when economic numbers were telling such different stories.”

Former Labor Secretary and economist Robert Reich writes at his brilliant Substack newsletter this week, after noting the global issues also contributing to American inflation:

“Big corporations continue to jack up prices, using inflation as a cover. Big Oil is the worst culprit. Gas prices are up about 60 percent from the year before. They contributed almost half the rise in inflation in June, although pump prices have dropped a bit since then. Big Oil is scoring record profits and using them to reward investors by buying back shares of stock. Shell is expecting profits to nearly triple, adding $1 billion to the bottom line. BP reports its largest quarterly profit in a decade.”

And nobody has ever, ever, ever accused the management of any of the big oil companies of wanting more Democrats running the show in Washington DC.

In an earlier post, Reich notes how some of America’s largest companies are enthusiastically funding some of America’s most seditious politicians.

“To state the question in historical terms,” he summarizes, “how different is their behavior from the wealthy European industrialists who quietly backed the fascists in the 1920s and 1930s? These billionaire and corporate funders are as complicit as are the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers in threatening American democracy.”

Indeed. And if they can kick American consumers in the shins hard enough to get them to “vote out the bums” currently running Washington DC — the Democrats — while adding an epic pile of cash to their money bins, all the better.

Hard to believe? Immoral? Remember, these are companies that continue to fund Republicans associated with Trump’s attempt to end our democracy. And if we still had competition in the American economic landscape, even imagining a scenario like I’ve laid out would be impossible.

Time will tell if my analysis is accurate, a paranoid fantasy, or (most likely) a bit of both. But it’s certainly worth Democrats in Congress calling a hearing to check it out.

Her Ex-Husband Is Suing a Clinic Over the Abortion She Had Four Years Ago

Experts say the Arizona lawsuit shows how civil suits could be used to intimidate providers and punish people who’ve had abortions.

https://www.propublica.org/article/arizona-abortion-father-lawsuit-wrongful-death

By Nicole Santa Cruz, Propublica

It’s unclear how many states allow an estate to be opened on behalf of an embryo or fetus. Some states, like Arizona, don’t explicitly define what counts as a deceased person in their probate code, leaving it to a judge to decide. In a handful of states, laws define embryos and fetuses as a person at conception, which could allow for an estate, but it’s rare.

Nearly four years after a woman ended an unwanted pregnancy with abortion pills obtained at a Phoenix clinic, she finds herself mired in an ongoing lawsuit over that decision.

A judge allowed the woman’s ex-husband to establish an estate for the embryo, which had been aborted in its seventh week of development. The ex-husband filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the clinic and its doctors in 2020, alleging that physicians failed to obtain proper informed consent from the woman as required by Arizona law.

Across the U.S., people have sued for negligence in the death of a fetus or embryo in cases where a pregnant person has been killed in a car crash or a pregnancy was lost because of alleged wrongdoing by a physician. But a court action claiming the wrongful death of an aborted embryo or fetus is a more novel strategy, legal experts said.

The experts said this rare tactic could become more common, as anti-abortion groups have signaled their desire to further limit reproductive rights following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade. The Arizona lawsuit and others that may follow could also be an attempt to discourage and intimidate providers and harass plaintiffs’ former romantic partners, experts said.

Lucinda Finley, a law professor at the University at Buffalo who specializes in tort law and reproductive rights, said the Arizona case is a “harbinger of things to come” and called it “troubling for the future.”

Finley said she expects state lawmakers and anti-abortion groups to use “unprecedented strategies” to try to prevent people from traveling to obtain abortions or block them from obtaining information on where to seek one.

Perhaps the most extreme example is in Texas, where the Texas Heartbeat Act, signed into law in May 2021 and upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in December, allows private citizens to sue a person who performs or aids in an abortion.

“It’s much bigger than these wrongful death suits,” Finley said.

Civia Tamarkin, president of the National Council of Jewish Women Arizona, which advocates for reproductive rights, said the Arizona lawsuit is part of a larger agenda that anti-abortion advocates are working toward.

“It’s a lawsuit that appears to be a trial balloon to see how far the attorney and the plaintiff can push the limits of the law, the limits of reason, the limits of science and medicine,” Tamarkin said.

In July 2018, the ex-husband, Mario Villegas, accompanied his then-wife to three medical appointments — a consultation, the abortion and a follow-up. The woman, who ProPublica is not identifying for privacy reasons, said in a deposition in the wrongful death suit that at the time of the procedure the two were already talking about obtaining a divorce, which was finalized later that year.

“We were not happy together at all,” she said.

Villegas, a former Marine from Globe, Arizona, a mining town east of Phoenix, had been married twice before and has other children. He has since moved out of state.

In a form his then-wife filled out at the clinic, she said she was seeking an abortion because she was not ready to be a parent and her relationship with Villegas was unstable, according to court records. She also checked a box affirming that “I am comfortable with my decision to terminate this pregnancy.” The woman declined to speak on the record with ProPublica out of fear for her safety.

The following year, in 2019, Villegas learned about an Alabama man who hadn’t wanted his ex-girlfriend to have an abortion and sued the Alabama Women’s Center for Reproductive Alternatives in Huntsville on behalf of an embryo that was aborted at six weeks.

To sue on behalf of the embryo, the would-be father, Ryan Magers, went to probate court where he asked a judge to appoint him as the personal representative of the estate. In probate court, a judge may appoint someone to represent the estate of a person who has died without a will. That representative then has the authority to distribute the estate’s assets to beneficiaries.

When Magers filed to open an estate for the embryo, his attorney cited various Alabama court rulings involving pregnant people and a 2018 amendment to the Alabama Constitution recognizing the “sanctity of unborn life and the rights of unborn children.”

A probate judge appointed Magers representative of the estate, giving him legal standing to sue for damages in the wrongful death claim. The case, believed to be the first instance in which an aborted embryo was given legal rights, made national headlines.

It’s unclear how many states allow an estate to be opened on behalf of an embryo or fetus. Some states, like Arizona, don’t explicitly define what counts as a deceased person in their probate code, leaving it to a judge to decide. In a handful of states, laws define embryos and fetuses as a person at conception, which could allow for an estate, but it’s rare.

An Alabama circuit court judge eventually dismissed Magers’ wrongful death lawsuit, stating that the claims were “precluded by State and Federal laws.”

Villegas contacted Magers’ attorney, Brent Helms, about pursuing a similar action in Arizona and was referred to J. Stanley Martineau, an Arizona attorney who had flown to Alabama to talk to Helms about Magers’ case.

In August 2020, Villegas filed a petition to be appointed personal representative of the estate of “Baby Villegas.” His ex-wife opposed the action and contacted a legal advocacy organization focused on reproductive justice, which helped her obtain a lawyer.

In court filings, Villegas said he prefers to think of “Baby Villegas” as a girl, although the sex of the embryo was never determined, and his lawyer argued that there isn’t an Arizona case that explicitly defines a deceased person, “so the issue appears to be an open one in Arizona.”

In a 2021 motion arguing for dismissal, the ex-wife’s attorney, Louis Silverman, argued that Arizona’s probate code doesn’t authorize the appointment of a personal representative for an embryo, and that granting Villegas’ request would violate a woman’s constitutional right to decide whether to carry a pregnancy to term.

“U.S. Supreme Court precedent has long protected the constitutional right of a woman to obtain an abortion, including that the decision whether to do so belongs to the woman alone — even where her partner, spouse, or ex-spouse disagrees with that decision,” Silverman said last year.

Gila County Superior Court Judge Bryan B. Chambers said in an order denying the motion that his decision allows Villegas to make the argument that the embryo is a person in a wrongful death lawsuit, but that he has not reached that conclusion at this stage. Villegas was later appointed the personal representative of the estate.

As states determine what is legal in the wake of Dobbs and legislators propose new abortion laws, anti-abortion groups such as the National Right to Life Committee see civil suits as a way to enforce abortion bans and have released model legislation they hope sympathetic legislators will duplicate in statehouses nationwide.

“In addition to criminal penalties and medical license revocation, civil remedies will be critical to ensure that unborn lives are protected from illegal abortions,” the group wrote in a June 15 letter to its state affiliates that included the model legislation.

James Bopp Jr.,general counsel for the committee, said in an interview with ProPublica that such actions will be necessary because some “radical Democrat” prosecutors have signaled they won’t enforce criminal abortion bans. Last month, 90 prosecutors from across the country indicated that they would not prosecute those who seek abortions.

“The civil remedies follow what the criminal law makes unlawful,” he said. “And that’s what we’re doing.”

The National Right to Life Committee’s model legislation, which advocates prohibiting abortion except to prevent the death of the pregnant person, recommends that states permit civil actions against people or entities that violate abortion laws “to prevent future violations.” It also suggests that people who have had or have sought to have an illegal abortion, as well as the expectant father and the parents of a pregnant minor, be allowed to pursue wrongful death actions.

Under the legislation, an action for wrongful death of an “unborn child” would be treated like that of a child who died after being born.

In one regard, Arizona has already implemented a piece of this model legislation as the state’s lawmakers have chipped away at access to abortion and enacted a myriad of regulations on doctors who provide the procedure.

The state’s “informed consent” statute for abortion, first signed into law by then-Gov. Jan Brewer in 2009, mandated an in-person counseling session and a 24-hour waiting period before an abortion. It allows a pregnant person, their husband or a maternal grandparent of a minor to sue if a physician does not properly obtain the pregnant person’s informed consent, and to receive damages for psychological, emotional and physical injuries, statutory damages and attorney fees.

The informed consent laws, which have changed over time, mandate that the patient be told about the “probable anatomical and physiological characteristics” of the embryo or fetus and the “immediate and long-term medical risks” associated with abortion, as well as alternatives to the procedure. Some abortion-rights groups and medical professionals have criticized informed consent processes, arguing the materials can be misleading and personify the embryo or fetus. A 2018 review of numerous studies concluded that having an abortion does not increase a person’s risk of infertility in their next pregnancy, nor is it linked to a higher risk of breast cancer or preterm birth, among other issues.

The wrongful death suit comes at a time of extraordinary confusion over abortion law in Arizona.

Until Roe v. Wade was handed down in 1973, establishing a constitutional right to abortion, a law dating to before statehood had banned the procedure. In March, Gov. Doug Ducey, a Republican who has called Arizona “the most pro-life state in the country,” signed into law a bill outlawing abortions after 15 weeks, and said that law would supersede the pre-statehood ban if Roe were overturned. But now that Roe has been overturned, Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, another Republican, said he intends to enforce the pre-statehood ban, which outlawed abortion except to preserve the life of the person seeking the procedure. On Thursday, he filed a motion to lift an injunction on the law, which would make it enforceable.

Adding to the muddle, a U.S. district court judge on Monday blocked part of a 2021 Arizona law that would classify fertilized eggs, embryos and fetuses as people starting at conception, ruling that the attorney general cannot use the so-called personhood law against abortion providers. Following the Supreme Court decision in Dobbs, eight of the state’s nine abortion providers — all located in three Arizona counties — halted abortion services, but following the emergency injunction some are again offering them.

In the wrongful death claim, Martineau argued that the woman’s consent was invalidated because the doctors didn’t follow the informed consent statute. Although the woman signed four consent documents, the suit claims that “evidence shows that in her rush to maximize profits,” the clinic’s owner, Dr. Gabrielle Goodrick, “cut corners.” Martineau alleged that Goodrick and another doctor didn’t inform the woman of the loss of “maternal-fetal” attachment, about the alternatives to abortion or that if not for the abortion, the embryo would likely have been “delivered to term,” among other violations.

Tom Slutes, Goodrick’s lawyer, called the lawsuit “ridiculous.”

“They didn’t cut any corners,” he said, adding that the woman “clearly knew what was going to happen and definitely, strongly” wanted the abortion. Regardless of the information the woman received, she wouldn’t have changed her mind, Slutes said. Slutes referenced the deposition, where the woman said she “felt completely informed.”

Martineau said in an interview that Villegas isn’t motivated by collecting money from the lawsuit.

“He has no desire to harass” his ex-wife, Martineau said. “All he wants to do is make sure it doesn’t happen to another father.”

In a deposition, Villegas’ ex-wife said that he was emotionally abusive during their marriage, which lasted nearly five years. At first, she said, Villegas seemed like the “greatest guy I’ve ever met in my life,” taking her to California for a week as a birthday gift. But as the marriage progressed, she said, there were times he wouldn’t allow her to get a job or leave the house unless she was with him.

The woman alleged that Villegas made fake social media profiles, hacked into her social media accounts and threatened to “blackmail” her if she left him during his failed campaign to be a justice of the peace in Gila County, outside of Phoenix.

Villegas denied the allegations about his relationship but declined to comment further for this story, Martineau said.

Carliss Chatman, an associate law professor at Washington and Lee University in Virginia, said certain civil remedies can also be a mechanism for men to continue to abuse their former partners through the court system.

“What happens if the father who is suing on behalf of the fetus is your rapist or your abuser? It’s another way to torture a woman,” Chatman said.

Chatman added that these legal actions can be a deterrent for physicians in states where abortion is banned after a certain gestational period, because the threat of civil suits makes it harder for doctors to get insurance.

The lawsuit has added to the stresses on Goodrick, who has been performing abortions in Arizona since the mid-1990s, and her practice. She said that since the lawsuit was filed, the annual cost of her medical malpractice insurance has risen from $32,000 to $67,000.

Before providers in Arizona halted abortions following the Supreme Court decision, people would begin lining up outside Goodrick’s clinic at 6 a.m., sometimes with lawn chairs in hand, like “a concert line,” Goodrick said.

“Every year there’s something and we never know what it’s going to be,” Goodrick said recently at her Phoenix clinic. “I’m kind of desensitized to it all.”

Now Launched: National 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline

Now people nationwide who are experiencing a mental health crisis and in need of immediate help will be able to dial or text 988 and receive assistance through the new Suicide and Crisis Lifeline number.

As the lead agency in developing a seamless roll out of 988, Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health or LACDMH has been preparing for this launch for more than a year to ensure operational logistics and response teams are in place to enable Los Angeles County community members to call 988 and receive immediate help during a mental health crisis.

LA County’s 988 Call Center Launched July 16.

A new 988 call center operated by Didi Hirsch is ready to take calls coming into the 988 hotline in Los Angeles County. Trained operators will triage callers to receive the appropriate services, including suicide crisis counseling over the phone and mental health de-escalation counseling over the phone. They will also triage callers to determine when dispatching a mobile crisis team is appropriate and, in rare cases, connection to law enforcement when safety is of concern.

Mobile Response Teams Increased

L.A. County has increased the number of teams of mental health professionals available to respond in-person to individuals experiencing a mental health crisis. The L.A. County Department of Mental Health now operates psychiatric mobile response teams or PMRT that consist of unarmed mental health workers who respond in person to people in crisis. These teams operate between the hours of 8 a.m. and 2 a.m. In the coming weeks, L.A. County will be expanding the number of PMRTs available and launching new mobile crisis outreach teams or MCOTs that will supplement them by providing crisis response outside of PMRT hours, making the services available 24/7. Both PMRTs and MCOTs will be connected through the 988 Call Center.

California Announces New Details on Efforts to Promote Nation-Leading Red Flag Laws

SACRAMENTO – In the wake of recent mass shootings across the nation, the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services or Cal OES announced $11 million in new community partnerships to expand outreach and education on the use of Gun Violence Restraining Orders – or “red flag laws” – to families, schools and communities most at risk for gun violence.

This 18-month campaign now includes recognized leaders in the gun violence prevention community movement:

  • $5 million to the California Partnership to End Domestic Violence in grants to local community-based domestic violence groups for community outreach.
  • $5 million to Hope and Heal Fund for statewide outreach to communities most at risk of gun violence including education efforts, research and multilingual outreach.
  • $1 million to the San Diego City Attorney’s Office for education and training for city attorney offices and law enforcement groups.

Each of these offices will work in tandem to ensure loved ones, teachers, or law enforcement know how to intervene and prevent someone in crisis from accessing firearms.

In the first three years of California’s GVRO law, officials used it to remove guns from 58 people who threatened to commit mass shootings, according to a study recently released by the Violence Prevention Research Program.

From 2016 to 2020, California courts issued 3,007 Gun Violence Restraining Orders. In 2020, the state issued 1,284 GVROs, 15-times greater than the 85 issued in 2016. That same year, California’s firearm death rate was 8.5 per 100,000 — the seventh-lowest in the nation, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

This law demonstrates the enormous potential to save lives to reduce violence and death by firearms by helping to de-escalate emergency situations. California was the first state in the country to pass legislation that gives family members the option to petition a court for this order.

“Two-thirds of Californians still don’t know about this law, so It is imperative to step up efforts to fully implement this law that has enormous potential to decrease firearm suicides and mass shootings,” said Brian Malte, Executive Director of the Hope and Heal Fund. This law is a critical tool in the toolbelt that gives family members a way to ensure their loved ones don’t harm themselves or others.”

LA County Regional Park And Open Space District Allocate More Than $9 Million in Funding

The Los Angeles County Regional Park and Open Space District or RPOSD announced the allocation of over $9 million in Measure A grant funding for technical assistance services to 30 cities and the unincorporated portions of the county that are in high and very high park-need areas. The funding allocation will be used to support and further park project development.

RPOSD established the Technical Assistance Program or TAP as part of the 2016 voter-approved funding from Measure A, the LA County safe, clean neighborhood parks and beaches measure, to assist agencies and organizations develop eligible park projects and competitive applications for its grant programs, and to help communities create multi-benefit park projects and programs throughout the county.

Since the passage of Measure A, RPOSD has allocated about $400 million in Measure A funds to cities and park development agencies to help fund new park space, create better access to existing parks, and improve park amenities.

TAP links high/very high park need entities with professional consultants, with expertise in various park development disciplines at no cost to the eligible city.

Details; https://rposd.lacounty.gov

Red Cross Blood Drive at CMA San Pedro

Red Cross Blood Drive

The American Red Cross is partnering with Discovery Shark Week to encourage blood donations throughout July. Since the pandemic, blood supplies have been chronically low. This blood drive will help. The blood drive will be held in the aquarium library. Proof of vaccination and a mask are required when you arrive. Everyone who participates will automatically be entered for a chance to win an exclusive Shark Week merchandise package along with a special t-shirt.

Time: July 18

Details: schedule an appointment at: RedCrossBlood.org

Venue: Cabrillo Marine Aquarium, 3720 Stephen M. White Drive, San Pedro

Ports Briefs: POLA Sets New June Cargo Record And POLB Sees Strongest June on Record

SAN PEDRO — The Port of Los Angeles moved 876,611 Twenty-Foot Equivalent Units or TEUs in June, edging out last year as the best June in the Port’s 115-year history. At the mid-point of 2022, the Port has handled more than 5.4 million TEUs, matching last year’s record-setting pace.

Seroka announced the June numbers at a media briefing, where he was joined by Retired Gen. Stephen R. Lyons, the recently appointed port and supply chain envoy to the Biden-Harris Administration Supply Chain Disruptions Task Force. Lyons discussed supply chain challenges nationwide and what is being done to improve the movement of goods and help lower costs for people.

Watch briefing here

June 2022 loaded imports reached 444,680 TEUs compared to the previous year, a decrease of 5% but 12% higher than the previous five-year June average.

Loaded exports came in at 93,890 TEUs, a 2.3% decrease compared to the same period last year. American exports out of the Port of Los Angeles have declined 39 of the past 44 months.

Empty containers reached 338,041 TEUs, an increase of 8.1% compared to last year.

On the other side of the harbor the Port of Long Beach achieved its most active June and busiest quarter on record, boosted by increased consumer demand as retailers stock shelves for back-to-school shopping.

Dockworkers and terminal operators moved 835,412 twenty-foot equivalent units in June, up 15.3% from the same month last year and surpassing the previous record set in June 2018 by 83,224 TEUs. Imports rose 16.4% to 415,677 TEUs, while exports saw a 1.4% decrease to 115,303 TEUs. Empty containers moved through the Port jumped 21.6% to 304,433 TEUs.

The cargo influx arrived as pandemic-induced shutdowns were lifted in China, retailers stocked up on back-to-school supplies and ongoing consumer demand continued to be robust despite inflation and the potential threat of an economic recession in 2023.

The port has moved 5,007,778 TEUs during the first half of 2022, up 5.3% from the same period last year. It was also the port’s best quarter overall with 2,547,119 TEUs moved from April 1 to June 30, breaking the previous record set during the first quarter of 2022 by 86,460 TEUs.

Sean Lane & The Hellhounds Regroup After Hiatus

The bands first appearance in several years happened July 17 at Music By The Sea.

After a hiatus, Sean Lane & The Hellhounds performed at Music by the Sea, July 17, as a power trio with Lane on guitar and vocals, Mike Murphy on drums and Ryan Gomez on bass. This was the first time the band had played in several years, even since before the pandemic.

Lane started The Hellhounds as a Delta blues slide guitarist and vocalist, writing original songs in the style of the old Mississippi masters. Los Angeles based with roots in the South, the Hellhounds are all about blending old tradition with modern innovation to create their own sound, raw, powerful, and distinctive.

The Hellhounds is a power quartet but on Sunday, it was a power trio because the harmonica player couldn’t make the gig. Lane told Random Lengths that the band hadn’t done a gig in a while because he began having a problem with his ear that turned out to be tinnitus. The band took a hiatus around 2017-2018. Eventually Lane bought professional earplugs that properly filtered noise, which enabled him to do solo gigs at places like Hollywood’s House of Blues, where he appeared regularly, Sassafras Saloon and Idle Hour. Then COVID-19 hit.

Sunday’s MbtS performance was his first in four years. But Lane has been staying busy. He did a lecture called History of the Blues where he did a talk and played music chronologically to show how the blues evolved. He was working on that around the time he started getting tinnitus. He also taught at Marymount College during the last 10 years, before it closed, in the theater department doing set design, lighting and sound. His father started the theater department there in 1974 and Lane grew up helping build sets and even performed in a few plays.

Lane said he always had a side business going, including guitar and amplifier repair, which came in handy during the pandemic. And it was a break from the hustle that being a musician requires. Soon enough, he missed playing. Performing at Music by the Sea was perfect timing in the perfect setting, outdoors, which he said is the safer thing to do.

In the meantime, he plans on putting out more recordings by the end of the year. The Hellhounds debuted a few new songs the band wrote during the pandemic. Lane said he was excited to give people something fresh to listen to.

Lane’s influences are Led Zeppelin, Cream, Jimi Hendrix and The Almond Brothers, Robert Johnson and the old time acoustic delta blues players. He’s also gotten into hill country blues, “the rhythmic RL Burnside type of stuff,” he said, calling it a cool genre of blues. Lane said the genre popped up in the early 2000s in the northern part of Mississippi, just below Memphis, where the land is hilly. It was influential among musicians so the music needed its own designation and that’s how it got its name. He said its sound is like the music of John Lee Hooker.

“One chord, very rhythmic and the artists that epitomize it are RL Burnside and T Model Ford, who is really raw … and Junior Kimbro,” Lane said. “There’s whole bands that were influenced by them – like The Black Keys, whose entire style is based on copying hill country blues. It was so influential that people like Buddy Guy were pressured by record companies to record that sound, around 2004.”

These different sounds — Delta blues, hill country and 1960s rock — have all influenced Lane’s songwriting style over the years. In fact, the last MbtS gig he did was under the moniker, Sean Lane and the Hill Country Blues Experience.

“I’ve gone out of my way to write music in a unique way with more of a Delta blues influence and that’s what sets me apart,” Lane said.

Details: www.reverbnation.com/thehellhoundsrock