Total of 2400 for a family of four. There is an extra hundred dollars a week in Unemployment Benefits it. Revives the Paycheck Protection Program with a cash infusion and it extends the Eviction Moratorium and also provides funding for vaccine distribution. Now, it does not provide liability shield for businesses. It does not provide money for state and local governments and it does not provide direct aid to the Restaurant Industry which has been so hardhit already. Many lawmakers are complaining the bill doesnt go far enough. But, Senate Majority leader Mitch Mcconnell says it hits the mark but he blames Speaker Pelosi for holding it up for so long. Well, so its noteworthy that at the end they finally gave us what we could have agreed to back in july. I think what held it up was they did not want to do anything before the president ial election. I think they felt that that would disadvantage the president. Griff its a far cry from where Speaker Pelosi began negotiating this summer a n
Hartwigschulman . Here. Commissioner hartwigschulman is here. Ike kwon . Here. Commissioner kwon is here. Commissioner mogannam is here. Christopher simi . Present. Commissioner simi is here. With five members present, we do have quorum for the sanitation and streets commission. Due to the on going covid19 Health Emergency and given the Public Health recommendations issued by the San Francisco department of Public Health and the emergency orders of the governor and the mayor concerning social distancing and lifting the restrictions on teleconference, this meeting is being held, is being held Via Teleconference and streamed by sfgov tv. Those watching the live stream being be aware theres a brief time lag between the time lag and whats shown on sfgt tv. I would love to extend our thanks to sfgov tv services and Building Management for their assistance putting on this meeting. For members of the public wishing to make Public Comment on an item outside, from outside the hearing room, you
Making changes sub rosa. If the court is going to make a change that actually changes the meaning of what was initially announced it should have an obligation to make that clear with some kind of supplement. [inaudible question] thank you, professor, for your presentation and your work. I was struck most of all for the freedom of speech in a deposition of the court in Citizens United. And i believe that the criticism about the individual judges raised a more profound question, and that is the as american democracy turning into a plutocracy, is the court a reflection of that kind of change . Well, some think it is a partial cause of that kind of change. Others think it is a reflection. I think it is more complicated ultimately than that. The reason that the court rules as it does in Citizens United is not a belief in that Corporate Power and wealth should dominate our society but a belief that government cannot be trusted to decide whose voices should carry weight. It is an antigovernme
The Current Court is moving rather frightening way to some people in the direction of reviewing laws that affect the economy in a serious way. For example, laws that were passed in vermont to make it harder for pharmaceutical companies to jack up charged by giving information about drugs to certain doctors so that there were prescribed more costly. The court struck that down on the basis of the First Amendment. After four joined the conservatives and match. Breyer went almost apoplectic. This is a return of what was called the locker area, the time from the 1890s in 1937 when the court was striking down economic legislation rather loosely. If you strike down an economic legislation simply because it deals with speech in one way or another, it deals with information information is at the heart of almost everything. And using the First Amendment that way could give the court the kind of power that i think is presuppose in your question. Some people think that is exactly what was right be
Former federal prosecutor Sidney Powell on what can be done about prosecutorial misconduct. She was at the Cato Institute to discuss her book i sent to my exposing corruption in the department of justice. This is about an hour and a half. Good afternoon and welcome to the Cato Institute. Im the director of the project on criminal justice. And today we want to examine some distressing legal trends that are at work in the criminal law area. Our guest speaker today has just written a new book entitled license to my exposing corruption in the department of justice and the book recounts several cases in which ambitious prosecutors use illegal and unethical tactics to win their cases. Before we get to the panel of experts, i want to take a minute or two to lay out a discussion that is going to follow but before i do that let me ask those that came with cell phones if you take a moment to doublecheck and make sure that they are turned off as a courtesy to our speakers. Thank you. The first po