With the death of Sergeant Nick Risner this weekend, our state has lost 10 law enforcement officers in 10 months and 24 officers in five years.

Sergeant Nick Risner was killed by a man whose name isn’t worth mentioning. That man had killed before—in fact, he killed his own father. In 2013, the man was sentenced to ten years in prison for manslaughter. A mere two-and-a-half years after entering prison, he was given the benefit of a parole hearing. His parole was denied.

While in prison, the man racked up a lengthy rap sheet. Records indicate that he got into a fight and seriously injured another inmate. He was disciplined for disobeying a correctional officer. He got caught with drugs in his possession, twice. Naturally, the man was awarded “good time,” provided for in statute, for this stellar behavior while incarcerated. As a result, the man served three years, two months, and fifteen days of his 10-year sentence. He was released from prison in May of 2016. Had he served the full length of his sentence, he would have been in prison, not in the Walmart parking lot, last Friday afternoon when Sergeant Risner was shot.

When the news of Sergeant Risner hit the wires over the weekend, politician after politician tweeted their support for law enforcement and their sympathy for the victims. But only days before, at the end of a five-day legislative session, a new law was enacted mandating that all inmates—including violent ones with histories just like this shooter’s—be let out of prison up to one year early to be “supervised” before the formal end of their sentence. Twenty-three house members and only six senators thought this was a bad idea.

Had this law been in effect when Sergeant Risner’s killer was initially sentenced, his 10-year sentence would have been reduced to a little over three years with automatic “good time,” and his paltry three years behind bars would’ve been further reduced to only two.

Consider too, that just six months ago, the legislature enacted yet another law that would reduce time served in prison under the “Education Incentive Time Act.” As introduced and passed unanimously by the Alabama Senate, rapists and murderers were to be considered for parole up to 12 months early for taking advantage of educational programming while in prison. Despite being publicly chided by a Republican member of the legislature for getting involved, my office successfully fought to have most violent offenders removed from this legislation.

Each time, the same tired rhetoric is used as justification for passage: our prisons are “overcrowded” and the inmates “are eventually going to get out anyway.” The current population of Alabama’s prisons is 81% violent. The population that is non-violent does not serve any appreciable time inside the prison walls. As evidenced by the “reforms” pushed last week, we are at a point where any further “reforms” will benefit primarily violent offenders—there is simply nobody else to “reform.”

I’m glad we’ve all agreed that we need to build prisons, but strangely, I seem to be alone in the view that most of our current prison population ought to stay locked up. The policymaking in this state is completely and utterly detached from what law enforcement and prosecutors see day in and day out. There must be a reckoning for the real-life consequences of these decisions. It is time that the Alabama public speak up and speak out about this dangerous, and seemingly endless, trajectory of “criminal justice reform.”

Your state leaders are not listening.

Steve Marshall is the 48th Attorney General of the State of Alabama

The federal government is not known for being particularly productive or efficient at solving problems. The truth is, Washington often creates more problems and more chaos than it solves. The past few weeks – and especially last week – are a prime example of this.

For the better part of this year, Democrats in the House and Senate have been working on two major pieces of legislation. The first is what they are calling the “Bipartisan Infrastructure Package,” which totals roughly $1.2 trillion. This legislation made it out of the Senate, but the House has not yet voted on it. Meanwhile, the Democrats have also been negotiating a $3.5 trillion taxing and spending increase, which they are calling “human infrastructure.” This bill contains outrageous policies including taxpayer funding for abortions, hundreds of billions for the Green New Deal, trillions in tax increases, the creation of a surveillance program allowing the IRS to monitor your bank transactions, and it provides amnesty for more than 8 million immigrants.

Progressive Democrats gave Speaker Pelosi an ultimatum that they would not vote on the $1.2 trillion bill without also getting the opportunity to vote on the $3.5 trillion liberal wish list bill. Speaker Pelosi promised both of these would come to the House floor for a vote by the end of September, but she fell flat on her face last week as the battle within the Democrat caucus got out of control. Members of both parties were in limbo all last week as we waited to find out if votes would be called on either of these bills. After many late nights and much confusion, neither bill made it to the House floor, demonstrating total dysfunction of a Democrat-led House, Senate and White House.

While these failed negotiations to ram through a liberal wish list were underway last week, Congress was facing several huge deadlines. September 30 was the end of the federal government’s fiscal year, and without congressional action, the government would be faced with a shutdown. Additionally, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen announced the federal government would hit its debt ceiling by October 18. Speaker Pelosi narrowly managed to pass a temporary spending bill to keep the government from shutting down, and instead of passing any real bipartisan infrastructure package, the House passed a 30-day extension to keep federal infrastructure projects moving along.

Given my background in infrastructure, I understand firsthand how infrastructure projects are a high priority for my district. Unfortunately, as a result of progressive Democrats’ unsuccessful attempts to push through Green New Deal projects and big government mandates, negotiations over legitimate investments in infrastructure have taken a back seat. The United States has real infrastructure needs – including roads, bridges, waterways, airports, and increased broadband access – but Democrats in Congress and the Biden administration have let down the American people. I will continue working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to make wise, targeted investments in actual infrastructure projects across the nation, but I will not support either of these two massive tax and spend bills.

Jerry Carl represents Alabama’s First Congressional District. He lives in Mobile with his wife Tina.

The COVID-19 vaccines have now been given to millions of people ages 12 and older under the most intense vaccine safety monitoring in history. Any claims that the vaccines are unsafe or ineffective are not true. Any claims that corners were cut to produce the vaccines are not true. Masks and social distancing, while definitely helpful, offer only so much protection. The vaccines are the best and most effective way to protect yourself and others around you from the seriousness of COVID. The facts are indisputable.

And yet, even after more than 4 million deaths from COVID have been reported worldwide, we are still confronted with misinformation about the vaccines every day, whether it’s a tweet from Nicki Minaj, a statement from Eric Clapton or tales of unproven remedies. Unfortunately, too many believe these untruths and then spread them. Some rumors can be dismissed as ludicrous and largely harmless, but others cause great harm.

One of the latest and most harmful pieces of misinformation is that “breakthrough infections” prove the vaccines don’t work. A “breakthrough” means that someone vaccinated against a disease or illness has tested positive for the disease-causing agent.

Breakthrough cases do not occur because vaccines are ineffective. No vaccine is 100% effective. Breakthrough cases occur because immunity can decrease over time. Breakthrough cases are also not unusual. For example, flu vaccines generally reduce the risk of getting the flu between 40-60% among the overall population during flu season, so there are many, many more breakthrough cases associated with the flu than with COVID.

COVID vaccines have been shown to provide protection against severe illness and hospitalization. Studies show that those vaccinated against COVID are eight times less likely to be infected and 25 times less likely to experience hospitalization or death. This is further confirmation that the vaccines save lives.

Think of it like this: your favorite football team has a much better chance of getting a first down on third down with two yards to go rather than facing third and 22. Likewise, you have a much better chance of staying out of the hospital with the COVID vaccine than without it.

Another dangerous falsehood claims that thousands of people have died from the COVID vaccines. This rumor emanates from the way information is reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Recording System (VAERS), which is run by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration. VAERS collects and reviews reports of adverse events – whether a health problem or side effect – that occur after vaccination. Unfortunately, because anyone can report adverse events to VAERS, it is not clear whether a vaccine actually caused the problem. Therefore, adverse health events reported to VAERS following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused the adverse health event being reported.

Unfortunately, deaths reported to VAERS following COVID-19 vaccination have been misinterpreted as if these deaths were proven to be caused by the vaccines. But as the CDC reports: “A review of available clinical information, including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records, has not established a causal link to COVID-19 vaccines.”

The COVID-19 vaccine is saving lives, and I strongly encourage everyone who is eligible to get vaccinated. The COVID vaccines are free, effective, safe and readily available. Is vaccination a 100% guarantee you will not get COVID? No, but there is no doubt that you are much better able to fend off and survive COVID if you are vaccinated.

Dr. Aruna Arora is board-certified in Neuromuscular Medicine and is medical co-director of the ALS Clinic in North Alabama/Huntsville. She serves as President of the Medical Association of the State of Alabama.

This past week there were three police officers shot in Alabama in less than 24 hours. Tragically, Sheffield Police Sgt. Nick Risner passed away from his wounds.

And as usual, one of the suspects is a repeat offender who should have been in jail completing his sentence for a prior homicide. Specifically, the accused who shot Sgt. Risner had previously been convicted of manslaughter and had only served three years of a 10-year sentence. He owed the victim and the public seven more years in prison. Sgt. Risner paid for that injustice with his life.

As we undergo a rise in crime across the country, citizens want to see their elected officials focus on strengthening public safety.

And while there is a very vocal group from the left who consistently support defunding the police, weakening criminal justice laws and opening the jails, the public is demanding safe neighborhoods.

It is clear Alabama voters demand to see their public officials enact strong laws to punish criminals, yet Alabama just held a special session and passed a new law which will allow more felons, including those convicted of violent crimes let out of prison before they have completed their sentences.

There is a push for even more of these types of bills that would weaken our criminal laws. These bills are inaccurately described as “sentencing reform” when in actuality they leave the public more vulnerable to violent felons. Many of these bills would let felons out of jail before they have completed their sentences or would reduce the amount of time they can be sentenced by a judge after they are convicted.

What the criminal justice system really needs is truth in sentencing to give the public confidence that those convicted will serve the time for their convictions. When the current sentencing guidelines scheme was proposed to the legislature, it was sold to them as part of a package that would include “truth in sentencing” as the next phase of the package. Of course, that proposal never came.

We need to stop the revolving door of violent felons committing crimes and then being released. Too many crime victims leave a courtroom after the sentencing of a convicted felon thinking justice has been served only to see the early release of the felon. The current Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles has done its part to protect the integrity of the process in ensuring when these inmates are released based on their sentences.

Alabama voters should now pay attention to what their state representatives and senators are doing in Montgomery to ensure they are strengthening the criminal justice system to reflect the will of state citizens and make public safety a priority.

The next regular session of the Alabama Legislature will begin in January. Lawmakers should make truth in sentencing one of the top issues to address during the next session. And when they do, they will honor the memory and service of Sgt. Risner and those others who lost their lives to felons who were walking the streets when they should have been sitting in a jail cell completing their sentence for a previous violent crime.

Paul DeMarco is a former member of the Alabama House of Representatives.

Our senior senator, Richard Shelby, has left an indelible legacy and imprint on our state. Every corner of the state has been the recipient of his prowess at bringing home the bacon to the Heart of Dixie. Every university has enjoyed a largesse of federal dollars. He has made the Huntsville Redstone Arsenal one of the most renowned high technology regions in the nation, not to mention placing the FBI’s second home in Huntsville.

Shelby’s accomplishments for Alabama would take a book to enumerate. However, what is not universally known is that Senator Richard Shelby has transformed the federal judiciary in Alabama for years to come.

During the entire eight-year presidency of Barack Obama, by nature, we had some attrition in our federal judiciary in all three regions, Northern, Middle and Southern Districts. Even though President Obama sought to appoint Democratic judges throughout the state, Senator Shelby and Senator Jeff Sessions thwarted all Democratic appointees and held these cherished and powerful judgeships vacant.

Shelby and Sessions were hopeful that one day there would be a Republican president coupled with a Republican Senate majority and they would be able to appoint Republican jurists to the federal bench in Alabama. That happened when Trump became president.

Senator Sessions had parted with his Senate seat to become attorney general, so that left Senator Shelby to select and get confirmed a host of new, young federal judges in Alabama.

Shelby assigned his loyal and brilliant chief of staff, Katie Boyd Britt, the job of vetting potential federal judgeships. She and Shelby chose an outstanding cadre of young, well-educated, extremely qualified, moderately conservative men and women to sit on the federal bench in Alabama.

This group is stellar and will be the majority of federal judges for the next 25 to 30 years. This coup of appointing young, conservative, extremely capable judges to the federal bench in Alabama may be one of Senator Richard Shelby’s greatest legacies.

Shelby had Andrew Brasher first appointed to the Middle District of Alabama. However, soon thereafter an opening occurred on the Eleventh Circuit and so Shelby had President Trump appoint Brasher to the higher appeals court. Prior to Brasher’s appointment to the Middle District, he practiced law with Bradley Arant in Birmingham. He was solicitor general and a law clerk for Judge Bill Pryor. Judge Brasher is a graduate of Samford University and Harvard Law School.

Senator Shelby had President Trump appoint Anna Manasco as a federal judge in the Northern District of Alabama. Judge Manasco, like Judge Brasher, practiced law in Birmingham with Bradley Arant prior to her federal appointment. She graduated with honors from Emory University, prior to earning her law degree from Yale Law School.

Shelby aligned with President Trump to appoint Corey Maze for a seat on the federal bench in the Northern District. Judge Maze was a prosecutor for the State of Alabama Attorney General’s office. He is a summa cum laude graduate of Auburn University and a graduate of Georgetown Law.

Senator Shelby had President Trump appoint Liles Burke to a federal judgeship in the Northern District. Burke was an associate judge of the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals prior to his federal appointment. He obtained his undergraduate and law degree from the University of Alabama.

Annemarie Axon is another Trump and Shelby anointed appointee for the Northern District of Alabama. Judge Axon practiced law in Birmingham prior to her appointment. She, like all of the other Northern District appointees, is extremely well qualified. Axon also obtained her undergraduate and law degree from the University of Alabama.

Austin Huffaker, Jr. of Montgomery was chosen by Shelby and Trump for a federal judgeship in the Middle District. He practiced law in Montgomery prior to his appointment. He has an engineering degree from Vanderbilt and earned his law degree from the University of Alabama School of Law.

Also appointed by Shelby and Trump to the Middle District is Emily Marks of Montgomery. Judge Marks practiced law in Montgomery prior to her appointment. She is a graduate of Spring Hill College in Mobile and the University of Alabama School of Law.

Jeffrey Beaverstock was appointed to a federal judgeship in the Southern District. He practiced law in Mobile and is a graduate of the Citadel and the University of Alabama School of Law.

Terry Moorer was appointed by President Trump and confirmed by the Senate for the Southern District. He was previously an assistant U.S. Attorney and is a graduate of Huntington College and the University of Alabama School of Law.

This host of federal jurists in Alabama will be one of Senator Richard Shelby’s lasting legacies.

Steve Flowers is Alabama’s leading political columnist. His weekly column appears in over 60 Alabama newspapers. He served 16 years in the state legislature. Steve may be reached at www.steveflowers.us.

In 2019, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez introduced the Green New Deal, with a price tag estimated at trillions to possibly tens of trillions of dollars. When asked whether Washington could afford the Green New Deal, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez said Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) showed that we could.

In recent years MMT has received considerable attention. The theory was first expounded by investor Warren Mosler and expanded by academic economists. Stephanie Kelton of Stony Brook University offers an accessible presentation in The Deficit Myth. Does MMT really overturn how we think an economy works?

MMT begins with the observation that, in Professor Kelton words, “Uncle Sam will never go broke.” Because of monetary sovereignty, the Federal government does not face the financial constraints of a household or business. Consequently, Kelton claims that Congress could “advance legislation – today – aimed at raising living standards and delivering the public investments in education, health care and resilient infrastructure that are critical for our long-term prosperity.”

Evaluating this claim requires unpacking the three components of monetary sovereignty. First, a nation must issue its own currency, so countries using the Euro do not qualify. Second, the currency must not be tied to gold, silver or anything the government might run out of. The U.S. has met this since President Nixon ended international convertibility of the dollar in 1971. Finally, a government must borrow in its own currency. Latin American nations which can only borrow in U.S. dollars fail here.

Yes, a nation with monetary sovereignty can always pay its debts by creating more currency. This observation, however, is not new. James Buchanan and Richard Wagner observed in Democracy in Deficit in 1977 that such monetization was the likely consequence of excessive borrowing by Washington, not default.

Professor Kelton rightly observes then that “For evidence of overspending, look to inflation.” But I think she ignores that a government’s ability to borrow depends on whether they intend to use money creation. Investors only lend to Venezuela in dollars because they fear being repaid with newly minted stacks of Venezuelan Bolivars. No immutable economic law requires that investors willingly purchase Treasury securities.

Money creation by government also has a moral dimension. You or I can only get dollars by giving up something of value: either our time working for someone or some possession with market value. Uncle Sam as a currency issuer can create money out of paper and ink, or by changing account balances. Proponents of the gold standard view government money creation as the moral equivalent of counterfeiting.

When does government spending produce inflation? Macroeconomics textbooks say when an economy is at full employment. Government spending can increase output when an economy is in a recession but primarily increases prices at full employment.

MMT defines full employment differently from the mainstream. The conventional economic definition allows for some churn in the job market and measured unemployment of perhaps 5% while taking the labor force participation rate (currently 62%) as given. MMT sees millions of idle workers at “full employment,” so only prodigious government spending is likely to produce inflation.

Should inflation become a problem, MMT proposes checking it through taxation. Again, there’s some truth here. Inflation is too many dollars chasing the available goods and services. Taxes can take dollars out of circulation, reducing inflationary pressure.

Professor Kelton further claims that government does not need to tax or borrow before it can spend, which makes spending seem like it is free. Yet she acknowledges that Uncle Sam must get control of resources to provide things like free college and free health care. The use of government coercion to take control of resources out of the private sector is still “paying” for spending.

For 35 years, some politicians have simply said “we cannot afford that” instead of arguing against increased spending on health care, childcare or education. Yet Uncle Sam has never been as broke as fiscal conservatives imply. Predictions of imminent national bankruptcy have primed people to accept MMT’s claim that we can afford any spending program Congress wants.

Daniel Sutter is the Charles G. Koch Professor of Economics with the Manuel H. Johnson Center for Political Economy at Troy University and host of Econversations on TrojanVision. The opinions expressed in this column are the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the views of Troy University.

Nothing happens without manufacturing. There are no planes, trains, nor automobiles to travel in; no homes to keep us safe and comfortable; no air conditioners nor furnaces; no food harvested, processed, brought to market, or delivered. You get the picture.

There are more than 900,000 manufacturing jobs open across the country right now, and the next 10 years will provide more than 4 million life-changing opportunities. Each manufacturing job pays more than a living wage. Down through the years, manufacturing employment has been the ladder of economic advancement for generations of families.

Here in Alabama, 13% of our employment is manufacturing and produces 17% of our state economic output, showing the positive productivity of our industry.

Closer to home for me, the Alabama iron and steel industry directly employs 14,900 workers and supports 76,388 indirect jobs. These payrolls are 1.48 and 4.68 billion dollars respectively. Alabama’s iron and steel industry annually adds 717 million dollars to our state and local tax coffers.

Manufacturing and agriculture create wealth, and I’m proud and grateful to be a part of it. The iron and steel industry is essential to construction, economic expansion and national security. And even closer to home, the manufacture of iron and steel water pipe from recycled raw materials contributes to public health and safety. Clean water is the greatest advancement in public health in the history of the world, and manufactured iron pipe is essential to that advance.

So on this Manufacturing Day, I salute the workers, the industry and the investors who make manufacturing possible here in America and in my home state of Alabama.

Maury D. Gaston is Manager of Marketing Services at AMERICAN Cast Iron Pipe Company in Birmingham, Alabama, and current Chairman of the Alabama Iron & Steel Council (AISC). The AISC operates as an independent industry council of Manufacture Alabama, the state’s only trade association dedicated exclusively to manufacturers and their supplier/vendor partners. AISC member companies include AM/NS Calvert, AMERICAN Cast Iron Pipe Company, CMC Steel, McWane, Inc., Nucor Steel, Outokumpu Stainless USA, SSAB Americas, U. S. Pipe & Foundry, United States Steel, Alabama Power Company, Colburn Construction, Inc., ERP Compliant Coke, OMI-Bisco Refractories, O’Neal Manufacturing Services, Reno Refractories, Southeast Gas and Southern Alloy Corporation.

With the selection of its next president, Alabama A&M University (AAMU) is at a pivotal point in its history. In a few days, the Board of Trustees will select the 12th president of the largest historically black college and university in the state.

As a business leader in Huntsville, a healthy and thriving AAMU is crucial for North Alabama’s success and continued growth. AAMU has an economic impact of over $350 million statewide and $228 million in the greater Huntsville area, according to the Center for Business and Economic Research at the University of Alabama’s Culverhouse College of Commerce. Through its more than 6,100 students and 1,092 employees, AAMU is ranked No. 19 among the top 20 largest employers in the Tennessee Valley region.

Since the announcement of Dr. Andrew Hugine’s retirement in December 2020, the Trustees have been strategically focused with establishing a framework for the presidential search process to deliver transparency and confidentiality for all candidates therefore, confirming accountability for the institution and the public.

Institutions today are challenged with an ever-changing economy, societal implications, the need for accountability, and academic performance. For AAMU to achieve its’ full potential the school must be led by an experienced and qualified individual with a vast higher education background.

In March, a diverse search committee, chaired by Trustee Dr. Wayne Watts, was formed consisting of trustees, faculty, staff, students, alumni, and community stakeholders committing time and a willingness to follow a strict code of confidentiality. The search committee collaborated with consultants from Academic Search, a leading higher education executive search agency, to begin the task of confirming the next president with the required academic experience, leadership, and administrative skills to lead AAMU.

According to Dr. Watts, in May, the search committee and search agency began holding sessions with university constituents including faculty, staff, students, alumni and board members to prepare a comprehensive university profile to draft a presidential search prospectus.

In June, the presidential search was publicly launched with a closing date of July 30 for applications to receive full consideration by the search committee and agency. Fifty-three applicants applied with 17% having served as current or former presidents or CEOs and 42% of the applicants were current or former vice presidents.

To ensure transparency, the board’s search process has been consistent with ACTA’s search process confirming that trustees determine the dates for the new president to assume office and a deadline for the search committee to provide the board with an unranked list of three to five final candidates.

I have been encouraged by the fact that trustees have executed a diligent search to secure a strong leader for continued long-term success. This collaborative eight-month process conducted by trustees, the search committee and the search agency has allowed for the development and distribution of the prospectus, review of applications, confirming unranked finalists, and interviews.

As a business owner and major employer in North Alabama, I am excited about AAMU’s future, and I look forward to working with the next president to build on President Hugine’s historic successes.

Billy Taylor serves as Founder and CEO of Hometown Lenders, Alabama’s largest independent mortgage lender and one of the fastest growing mortgage lenders in the nation.

For months now, I have been making the point that liberal politicians in Washington love creating crisis after crisis to distract the American people from what’s really happening. We’ve seen this time and time again with the Biden administration – each time something has gone wrong, the administration has stirred up a new crisis to draw everyone’s attention to something new. The crisis at our southern border is a perfect example of this, and last week President Biden’s disinformation crusade was on full display.

Images of U.S. Border Patrol agents supposedly “whipping” Haitian immigrants last week stirred up a media frenzy, and the Biden administration leaned into this false narrative to distract from the real problems at the border and the administration’s failed policies. The liberal media, who obviously know nothing about horses, claimed agents were using whips to stop migrants from entering the country.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki said the president and his administration were “horrified by the photos of the Border Patrol officers and that behavior.” The truth is agents were twirling their rains to direct the horses to follow their commands, but the Biden administration wants the American people focused on a fake cultural outrage crisis rather than an actual one impacting the safety and security of our nation.

Unlike President Biden, I’ve been to the border to see the issues firsthand. While I was there, I sat down with numerous Border Patrol agents to ask them what they deal with on a daily basis and how Congress could help them. Their responses were very clear: Finish building the wall and get us more help. These are two simple, straightforward solutions to significantly improve our border security, but President Biden has done the exact opposite. One of his first actions in office was stopping the building of the wall, and now instead of giving Border Patrol agents the resources they desperately need, he is saying he will “make them pay!” for doing their job.

Folks in South Alabama have enough common sense to know the truth, despite President Biden’s attempts to smear law enforcement officials and distract from the border crisis he’s created. Let’s move past this fake crisis and get the border under control. We are a nation of law and order. Without a secure border, we cannot protect the health, safety and security of Americans. It’s time to finish the wall, give our Border Patrol agents the resources they need, and get our southern border secure.

Jerry Carl represents Alabama’s First Congressional District. He lives in Mobile with his wife Tina.

American family farms are under attack – both from within our very own country and from China.

On top of the inherent uncertainty that they already have to deal with, our nation’s family farms are now being undercut by Chinese-owned farms located within our borders.

Chinese agricultural investments abroad grew more than tenfold from 2009-2018, with the Chinese Communist Party supporting these investments in order to gain more control of the global food supply chain.

Unfortunately, this trend was especially pronounced right here in the United States. At the beginning of 2020, China controlled about 192,000 agricultural acres in America, worth $1.9 billion.

The problem goes beyond farmland, as well. Two of the four largest meat companies in the U.S. market are now foreign-owned: Smithfield and JBS.

However, it is not just the Chinese Communist Party putting America’s farmers in their crosshairs.

As Joe Biden continues to push Congress to pass his disastrous $3.5 trillion spending proposal, he is also trying to tax family farms across our nation into bankruptcy.

Biden is proposing to make the existing Death Tax even worse, effectively turning it into a Death Knell Tax for American farm families.

A study by Texas A&M recently found that Biden’s new estate tax proposals would affect 98% of U.S. family farms, with an average price tag of $1.4 million per farm.

For the typical family farm in America and in Alabama, this would simply shutter their doors – or force them into the hands of Chinese investors.

At a time when the federal government is ramping back up burdensome, overreaching regulations and red tape and inflation is on the rise, family farms cannot afford Biden’s tax-and-spend boondoggle to move forward.

This is an issue especially important to Alabama, as agriculture is our state’s largest industry with an annual economic impact over $70 billion.

Born and raised in Coffee County, I saw firsthand that farming acts as the economic engine for communities in every corner of our state. More than 20% of Alabama jobs are related to agriculture, and Biden’s plan could cripple our state.

I will be an unwavering champion for hardworking farmers, cattlemen and everyone in the forestry sector as the next senator for Alabama. I will fight senseless regulations and stand up for family farmers at every turn. Our farmers have been tending to Alabama’s land for generations, and they don’t need federal bureaucrats telling them how to earn their livelihood.

Farmers also rely on exports for their livelihood, and I will work tirelessly to ensure all of Alabama’s industries are getting a truly fair shake in foreign trade.

Additionally, modern precision agriculture requires advanced technology and equipment, some of which requires high-speed broadband internet service. Unfortunately, Alabama ranks nearly last in the nation when it comes to broadband connectivity. I will be a staunch supporter of efforts to expand affordable broadband service to all Alabamians, so zip codes don’t define opportunity for our citizens.

The list of challenges and opportunities facing Alabama farmers runs much longer, from workforce issues to commodity nuances in the Farm Bill to stability at the USDA.
Prioritizing these needs is key to Alabama’s future, and I will do just that in the Senate.

Katie Britt is a Republican candidate to serve as the next U.S. Senator for Alabama. An Enterprise native, Katie resides in Montgomery with her husband, Wesley, and their two children, Bennett and Ridgeway.

The 2021 Economic Freedom of the World (EFW) rankings from Canada’s Fraser Institute show freedom essentially unchanged in the United States. But some important changes in the rankings will be coming soon.

Economic freedom is based on “the concept of self-ownership.” We should have “a right to choose – to decide how to use [our] time and talents to shape [our] lives.” What does economic freedom mean in practice? “Individuals are economically free when they are permitted to choose for themselves and engage in voluntary transactions as long as they do not harm the person or property of others.” With a high degree of economic freedom “the choices of individuals will decide what and how goods and services are produced.”

The EFW index turns this concept into a measure now applied to 165 countries. The index features five component areas: Size of Government (the levels of taxing and spending); Legal System and Property Rights; Sound Money; Freedom to Trade Internationally; and Regulation, which includes credit and labor markets as well as general business restrictions. Each element is scored from 0 to 10 (10 being more freedom) and the five area scores are averaged to generate a nation’s score.

The United States ranks 6th in 2021 (as in 2020) with a score of 8.24 which is a mere 0.02 points lower than last year. Hong Kong and Singapore take the top two spots, with scores of 8.91 and 8.81, with New Zealand, Switzerland and the Republic of Georgia rounding out the top five. The bottom five nations are Zimbabwe, Algeria, Libya, Sudan and Venezuela in last. Socialist Venezuela is not necessarily the most consistent practitioners of Marxism today as a lack of data keep Cuba and North Korea from being rated.

Looking across the five areas of the index, the U.S. ranks 6th in regulation, 15th in Sound Money, 19th in Property Rights, 52nd in Size of Government, and 64th in International Trade. The Size of Government scores deserve comment. Many European nations have high taxes and spending but otherwise a lot of freedom. For example, Denmark ranks 10th overall despite ranking 150th in size of government. On the other hand, many weak governments tax and spend little while failing to protect property rights; Sudan ranks 7th in the size of government but next to last in overall freedom.

The 2021 EFW rankings use data from 2019 due to lags in compiling statistics and surveys. The rankings consequently are always somewhat backward-looking. Two ongoing events will soon shake up the ratings.

The first involves China’s crackdown on Hong Kong. Hong Kong has always been rated separately from China (currently 116th), initially because it was a British colony and then because of its Special Administrative Region status. Yet China is now reneging on this deal. Hong Kong’s Legal System score should decline precipitously producing a new #1 for the first time in EFW history.

The current report also does not reflect policy responses to the pandemic. To me the freedom to trade internationally is most vulnerable. The pandemic has initiated what some are calling deglobalization. COVID-19 has made international travel and trade seem dangerous in a way it was not before.

Over the past 18 months the international shipment of goods has been disrupted but rarely strictly prohibited. Travel has been more restricted. Quarantine rules and potential travel suspensions raise the cost of visiting suppliers in Malaysia or China. The relevant economic question is whether businesses can maintain global operations without frequent face-to-face interaction.

This likely depends on the oft-predicted “death of distance,” where technology eliminates the need for face-to-face interactions. Yet proponents have been predicting distance’s demise for two decades. The adequacy of distance communications probably depends more on psychology than economics.

Economist Adam Smith identified how the division of labor increases productivity with a bigger market allowing greater division of labor. A global market allows the greatest division possible, to our benefit. Our standard of living depends on the survival of international trade with diminished international travel.

Daniel Sutter is the Charles G. Koch Professor of Economics with the Manuel H. Johnson Center for Political Economy at Troy University and host of Econversations on TrojanVision. The opinions expressed in this column are the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the views of Troy University.

Huntsville has rocketed past Birmingham as Alabama’s largest city. It is not named the Rocket City for nothing. The Census Bureau had been predicting this amazing boom in population in the Madison (Huntsville)/Limestone area, but the actual figures recently released reveal a bigger growth than expected. Huntsville grew by 20% or 35,000 people and is now a little over 215,000.

On the other hand, Birmingham shrank by 12,000 or 5% to 201,000 people. Montgomery held its own, and Montgomery and Birmingham are actually in a virtual tie for second at around 200,000. Mobile shrank to 187,000 and is now the smallest of the “big four” cities in the state.

Our big four cities of Huntsville, Birmingham, Montgomery and Mobile are all led by sterling mayors. Birmingham’s mayor, Randall Woodfin, and Mobile’s mayor, Sandy Stimpson, both won overwhelming reelection victories in late August elections.

Mayor Randall Woodfin won a very impressive reelection landslide victory on August 24. Woodfin garnered an amazing 65% of the vote against seven opponents. He won his first race for mayor four years ago, the old-fashioned way. He went door-to-door and knocked on an estimated 50,000 doors. He followed up this year by running one of the most picture-perfect campaigns in modern times. He again had a stellar grassroots campaign with a host of volunteers that knocked on an estimated 80,000 doors.

Mayor Woodfin and his team are brilliantly adapting to the modern politics of using social media, yet he adroitly employs the old-school politics of mainstream television, traditional media and getting out the vote. The initial polling on the mayoral race indicated that Woodfin could probably win reelection without a runoff, but nobody saw the 65% final result figure. I am convinced that the ad firm that designed his television ads garnered him a 12% boost from 53% to 65% with an ad using his mother. The ad featured Mama Woodfin asking her friends and neighbors in Birmingham to vote for her boy. She was a superstar.

Mobile Mayor Sandy Stimpson also won an impressive 63% reelection victory on August 24. He was elected to his third term. Stimpson is a successful businessman from an old silk stocking Mobile family. He is doing the job as a civic duty. Mobilians must think he is doing a good job. Stimpson ran a positive campaign and spent a lot of money. Stimpson will be entering his third four-year term as mayor of the Port City. On election night, he indicated that this may be his last hurrah, noting that he will be 73 in 2025 and may be ready to hand over the reins.

Huntsville’s mayor, Tommy Battle, won an impressive reelection last year. Montgomery Mayor Steven Reed also won a very impressive first term election in 2020. The mayors of our four major cities are indeed popular.

There is another dynamic developing in our state. The Morehouse College Degree and experience has become the standard of success among the new African American leaders in the state. It seems that this traditional historic college in Atlanta is where our elite leaders are spawned.

The leadership of Montgomery are all products of this proud institution of higher learning. It is truly a powerfully bonded fraternity. Mayor Steven Reed, State Senator Kirk Hatcher, Probate Judge J.C. Love, and Circuit Judge Greg Griffin all have the same pedigree. They all were born and raised in the capital city, went off to Morehouse for their education and national political networking, then came home to lead their city and Montgomery County.

Birmingham Mayor Randall Woodfin is a Morehouse man. In his first race, his Morehouse friends and fraternity brothers from throughout the country, many of whom are professionals, doctors, lawyers and businessmen came to the Magic City to campaign and knock-on doors for Woodfin. There was a room full of Morehouse men at Woodfin’s victory celebration on August 24 as he won his second term.

By the same token, Huntsville Mayor Tommy Battle and Mobile Mayor Sandy Stimpson are products of the old school, 100-year-old University of Alabama fraternity called “The Machine.” Battle was a member of Kappa Sigma and Stimpson was a Delta Kappa Epsilon.

In closing even though Huntsville is the largest city, folks in the Rocket City should not get too big of a head. The Birmingham/Hoover metro area is still by far the largest metropolitan area of the state by a 2-to-1 margin.

Steve Flowers is Alabama’s leading political columnist. His weekly column appears in over 60 Alabama newspapers. He served 16 years in the state legislature. Steve may be reached at: www.steveflowers.us.

The need to address Alabama’s longstanding prison infrastructure challenges is imperative.

After many months of education and substantive discussions between the Governor’s Office and the Alabama Legislature, a bipartisan proposal has been put forth to deliver an “Alabama solution” to this very real Alabama problem.

On Monday, the Alabama Legislature will convene in a special session. In addition to reviewing legislation to expand upon previously enacted criminal justice reform packages, we will work to approve legislation which would build two new male prisons and purchase and repurpose the Perry County Correctional Facility as a rehabilitation and re-entry facility. The proposal also lays out a plan to renovate three existing prisons, build a new female prison, and conduct a system wide facilities assessment once construction is complete to evaluate future needs.

The time to act is now.

Why? Public safety is paramount, and it requires proper infrastructure.

Prisons must be designed and well-maintained to safely house the most dangerous among us. “Dilapidated” should never be used to describe these types of vital public safety facilities, which are one of the keys to ensuring law-abiding Alabamians remain safe. Unfortunately, the condition of Alabama’s prison buildings has grown increasingly worse, year-over-year, for many decades. It’s a problem that will not fix itself.

And now we are at a crossroads – we must not continue to kick the proverbial can. Due to our prisons’ deteriorating physical condition, working conditions for our corrections staff are unacceptable and have contributed to staffing shortages. And, as these outdated facilities were never designed to house the people currently incarcerated in Alabama, instances of violence pose a real challenge.

Improving our criminal justice system, and thereby enhancing public safety – which we believe to be of critical importance – must begin with methodically replacing our aging, dilapidated prisons.

A prison sentence not only is a punishment, but also an opportunity to rehabilitate.

Not many realize this, but 95% of the people currently serving a prison sentence will be released back into our communities. They’ll serve their sentence, pay their debt to society, and go home as free citizens. Only a small fraction will remain in prison for life.

When inmates are released from prison, they should come home better prepared to be successful, productive members of society. They should be better educated. They should have a skill or a trade. They should be employable and pay taxes. They should be able to break their cycle of criminal behavior and become, like those of you reading this, law-abiding citizens.

Sending someone to prison – only to have them be released and commit more crime – hurts everyone.

Alabama needs safer, modernized prisons that are designed to accommodate the rehabilitation of returning citizens – a place where inmates can make a conscious choice to take advantage of more opportunities to improve their lives.

This legislation is – without question – the fiscally conservative option.

We don’t use the words “dilapidated” and “deteriorating” lightly. Our prisons are structurally failing – as in, we have shut some of them down because they are deemed too unsafe to operate – at a rate of approximately one every 24 months.

Because the maintenance of our current prisons was neglected for decades, the costs to repair them have skyrocketed. We currently face more than $1 billion in deferred maintenance costs alone, which means the state would need to spend more than one billion dollars – that’s billion with a capital “B” – just to keep our poorly designed prisons operational.

The long-term costs to Alabama’s taxpayers to keep these aging facilities from failing are simply unsustainable and far outweigh the costs of building new, better-designed facilities for a modern era.

If we don’t act, a federal court will. And federal intervention has proven to be costly.

Alabama is currently under federal court scrutiny for the conditions of our prisons. We currently operate under more than 15 different federal court orders, each with multiple and costly mandates.

Consider this: over the past five years, 85 cents of every dollar that the Alabama Department of Corrections’ budget has been increased by is directly tied to a court order. Building new facilities won’t alleviate every concern of the federal courts, but it will go a long way in proving our commitment to addressing several real needs within our criminal justice system.

The Alabama General Fund – the Alabama Budget that takes care of everything in our state other than educational needs – supports various state needs such as mental health, the court system, state troopers, conservation of Alabama’s wildlife and much, much more.

If we fail to act, Alabama potentially may be subject to even more federal court control, thereby handing our corrections system and your tax dollars over to an unelected federal judge who could dictate the way we spend our taxpayers’ money, how we protect our citizens from dangerous criminals, and other types of intervention that could last for years if not decades.

For example, California’s prison system – which did not make the types of improvements we are trying to undertake – was forced to reduce its prison population by more than 40,000 criminals and spend millions upon millions of dollars of avoidable federally mandated costs.

Alabama isn’t California – we’ve never acted like them, and we aren’t about to start now.

Critics of prison construction have claimed that Alabama can’t “build its way out of this problem” or that “money can’t rehabilitate people, only good policy can.” Those are catchy soundbites, but it’s backwards thinking. It’s like building a house from the roof-down – doomed to fail unless a strong foundation is put in place first. That’s what this legislation does – it builds a strong foundation on which we can implement sound policy.

Alabama’s leaders have developed a comprehensive solution to address our decades-old prison infrastructure problem. We’re reaching down and picking up this can once and for all because it’s the right thing to do. This is the first of many important issues we will tackle that are critical to improving our criminal justice system and changing the state’s trajectory for decades to come.

This op-ed was co-authored by: Governor Kay Ivey, Speaker Mac McCutcheon, President Pro-Tempore Greg Reed, House Minority Leader Anthony Daniels & Senate Minority Leader Bobby Singleton

When Johnny and I first married, times were tough. He was in school, and I was working a minimum-wage job. We had to watch every penny. We did without, and we made do, and we lived on what money we had at the time. Why can’t the federal government do the same?

Now, we’re seeing yet another verse of the same old debt-limit song from Washington. The Democrats are pushing Bernie Sanders’ $3.5 trillion dollar budget while Treasury Secretary Yellen is saying that unless the debt ceiling is raised, the United States will default on our debt payments for the first time in history.

On Monday, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Schumer announced that they would combine bills to suspend the debt limit once again with an emergency spending bill to avoid a government shutdown and default.

Thankfully, congressional Republicans are going to make the Democrats do this all on their own, so there will be no question about who owns it. Republicans know that the Democrats will use suspending the debt limit to fuel their wasteful spending on their progressive wish list.

We’re lucky that on Monday the Senate parliamentarian blocked an attempt by the Democrats to put amnesty for millions of illegals in the budget. This would have basically created a new immigration policy without any input from Republicans and would have cost us an estimated $109 billion dollars, and included green cards, education, and other benefits for roughly 10 million illegals. Pelosi, Schumer, Sanders and company want to keep turning illegals into Democrat voters, and they want you to pay for it on the nation’s credit card.

The Democrats want to import voters so they can stay in power forever, and they expect us to foot the bill. They want to ram through a $3.5 trillion budget using the reconciliation process without Republicans having any say in the process, never mind that it would cause trillion-dollar deficits for the next 10 years.

They want to borrow and spend on every kind of perk for themselves, like a $200 million park near Pelosi’s home, when the country isn’t able to pay its credit card bill now.

This nonsense has to stop. I support our congressional Republicans in blocking the Democrats’ out-of-control spending. We also have to stop allowing immigrants to pour across our southern border, spreading themselves and the COVID they carry across the country and draining federal, state and local resources where they settle. Until we get a handle on the Biden border crisis, we’ll continue to run up bills paying for it. We can’t fix one without fixing the other, as the Democrats’ amnesty end-run in the budget just proved.

It’s time that Congress started living within the country’s means. We need to kill this budget bill, then focus on fixing our hard infrastructure that’s been ignored for decades, meeting our country’s real needs, and cutting the waste so we only spend what we take in. Ordinary families and most states do this all the time. What will it take for the federal government to start doing this?

I strongly urge the Republicans in Congress to save this bill, because it’s a necessary first step toward saving America.

Lynda Blanchard served as President Trump’s United States Ambassador to Slovenia, the First Lady’s birth country. Ambassador Blanchard is also a successful business woman from Montgomery, where she is involved in many philanthropic activities. She is a mom to 8 wonderful kids. Ambassador Blanchard is one of only 3 Presidential appointed Ambassadors in history, from the state of Alabama. She is currently running for U.S. Senate.

How many of you recently went to a local restaurant only to find a sign on the door that read, “sorry due to the current situation we are now closed on weekends.” Or went to the grocery store to find the item you need has gone up significantly in price, or not in stock. This is a common occurrence for most Americans these days.

Unfortunately, businesses are being forced to cut back on hours and services to stay open. This problem is not due to mismanagement or poor business practices, but rather bad policies. Policies such as our government telling private businesses how and when they can operate, out-of-control spending, and paying people more to stay home than they can earn on the job. Policies have consequences and you and your family are paying for them.

Democratic policies have done nothing but worsen our labor shortage and inflation. If you don’t believe me then look at the numbers. According to the latest data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), we have reached a year-over-year high of 10.1 million job openings. Up from 6.1 million open jobs the same time last year. The most recent jobs report disappointed greatly. Economists had expected 720,000 new jobs created in August, and we got a measly 235,000. According to a CNBC survey, half of small business owners are having more difficulty finding qualified workers compared to this time last year. Nearly one-third of businesses have been unable to fill their jobs for at least three months. Sadly, unfilled jobs mean more businesses cutting hours or shutting down completely.

A once in a century pandemic has no doubt been difficult to manage, but Democratic policies have added fuel to the fire. Biden spent nearly $2 trillion in COVID relief earlier this year. Congress is currently considering a $1.2 trillion infrastructure package, and another $3.5 trillion “infrastructure” package on top of that, although that package is nothing but a liberal wishlist. That’s nearly $7 trillion in new spending in this year alone. We cannot sustain this misuse of your tax dollars. Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, and Chuck Schumer won’t be around to deal with this problem. It will be my generation and the next who will be left to pay the tab.

This out-of-control-spending has caused our inflation to skyrocket. Gas is up 41.8% from last year, the energy sector is up 23.8%, hotels are up 24.1%, used cars & trucks are up 41.7%, and worst of all, bacon is up 11.1%. The Democratic party says their bills won’t tax the middle-class, but when your dollar does less it is a direct tax on your bank account, and disproportionately affects lower-to-middle income families.

You wouldn’t know it from the media, but Republican-led states are having economic success at a significantly higher rate than their counterparts. Take a look at the unemployment rate by state. The top 10 best performing states in the country for unemployment rates are all led by Republican governors. The bottom 10 all led by Democrats. Thankfully, Governor Ivey has kept Alabama open and done her part to combat the stringent federal policies the best she can. Alabama currently ranks 7th in the country for unemployment and had one of the fastest economic recoveries.

My background is in economic and workforce development. I’m running for Congress because I’ve seen first-hand how bad policies out of Washington keep businesses from growing. From higher taxes on small businesses, to burdensome regulations, and to disincentivizing work, we have to fight to reverse these Democrat-led policies. I believe in empowering people, not the government. Free markets and fiscal responsibility has led to more people moving up the economic ladder than any other system. You can count on me to do my job in Washington to fight the unacceptable Democratic policies, and make sure that socialism never finds a home in America.

John Roberts is a Republican candidate for Congress in Alabama’s fifth congressional district

Since the earliest days of his campaign for the presidency, President Biden claimed he would raise taxes only on wealthy people, while not raising taxes on households earning under $400,000. Despite these claims, President Biden’s executive orders and Democrats’ bad policies have resulted in rising prices at the pump, rising prices at the grocery store, and increases in the cost of living across the board. Most of these cost increases can be traced directly back to the rise in fuel prices, which are hitting all of us in the wallet.

Fuel prices alone are up about a dollar per gallon compared to this time last year. Not only does this cost you and your family more at the pump, but it also drives up the cost of nearly every consumer good due to increased shipping costs. For example, natural gas is a key component of fertilizer, and higher natural gas costs will result in higher fertilizer costs, which will then increase food prices.

Fuel supply deficits – primarily caused by recent weather events – prove how crucial it is for the United States to increase domestic oil and natural gas drilling rather than rely on importing fuel from countries like Russia and China. President Trump did a great job of moving the U.S. toward energy independence for the first time in decades because he understands relying on other countries for our fuel puts us at a strategic disadvantage.

Some may argue drilling is dirty and bad for the environment, but we have clean energy options like natural gas, which we can drill right here at home. Thanks to free-market technology and innovations, we’ve come so far in recent decades with moving toward cleaner, more sustainable energy, and we’ve made a lot of progress toward better protecting our environment in the process.

Unfortunately, President Biden is working hard to crush American energy production while pursuing unsustainable Green New Deal energy policies. One of his first actions as President was canceling new oil and gas leases in the Gulf Coast. This decision not only pushes America toward energy dependence on other countries, but it also robs Alabama of critical Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act (GOMESA) funds, which go toward coastline restoration and environmental protection projects.

While I’m not opposed to moving toward cleaner energy, we can’t just throw solar panels on an F-18 and expect it to fly very fast. I fully support free-market, sensible solutions to continue moving toward cleaner energy and a healthier environment, but I strongly oppose President Biden’s big government Green New Deal mandates. These mandates are simply a tax on hardworking Americans across the country, and I will do all I can to fight them.

Jerry Carl represents Alabama’s First Congressional District. He lives in Mobile with his wife Tina.

As the pandemic continues around the nation, one highly effective medication for those that have already contracted COVID-19 is the monoclonal antibody treatment. Thousands of patients across Alabama have received this treatment, and it has proven to keep patients out of the hospital and prevent deaths by up to 70%.

Yet, as infections and deaths from the virus continue to climb in Alabama at record rates, the Biden administration has abruptly limited the amount of monoclonal antibody treatment to many states, including Alabama. The Alabama Department of Public Health was given short notice that the treatment drugs could be limited significantly and would now have to be distributed directly to the state by the federal providers, instead of to hospitals and other private healthcare sites. Limiting the supply will lead to less medications for patients who need it to avoid serious outcomes.

Alabama has millions of dollars in federal health care grants for COVID-19 relief that have not been spent and can still be appropriated. That money should be used to purchase more monoclonal antibody treatments to make up for the restrictions imposed by the president. Florida is looking at taking the same approach to prevent more of its citizens from being hospitalized.

Alabama leaders must take action immediately to protect the lives of Alabama citizens during this pandemic.

Governor Kay Ivey and the Alabama Legislature should implement plans to order the medications directly from other manufacturers of this treatment.

We cannot allow the Biden administration to limit supplies, which could cost more hospitalizations and fatalities in Alabama.

Paul DeMarco is a former member of the Alabama House of Representatives

Experience is the practical scientific method.

Some things succeed while other things fail; observing the reasons for success should help draft a blueprint for planning the future. It may be vogue to regard the past as nothing more than a sentimental embrace of the pre-modern world, but the laboratory of human conflict yields tangible results that can be examined, quantified and reviewed to consider best practices.

What can we learn when the autocrat’s autocrat allows a form of pluralism that is against type?

That Louis XIV, King of France and in his mind, King of the World, would shed ruthless conquest for negotiated peace is not something many monarchs embraced 340 years ago.

But, against his own pattern for subjugating other provinces to his iron will, Louis allowed the Protestant city of Strasbourg to stay virtually intact with limited oversight of superintending the city’s government.

This was not the normal behavior for the 17th Century: conquest led to subjugation, which, in turn, led to exploitation. In the short term, this policy created wealth to the conqueror but also seething resentment in the populace seeking an opportunity to throw off the yoke and regain independence.

Strasbourg spoke mostly German and was overwhelmingly Lutheran. But rather than join its neighbors and engage in devastating sectarian conflict, it wisely choose to pursue a policy deferring to commerce more than religion.

The leaders of Strasbourg realized that religious war benefitted only arms dealers and morticians; they understood that communities lose when trade is stifled by conflict. Ahead of its time, Strasbourg understood that religious conviction that led to armed conflict was not true religion at all. It thus refused to embrace the fervor of religious belief other provinces co-opted into a misguided rage that demanded acceptance on the pain of death.

It would be neither the first nor last time that religious zeal would be compromised by politicians anxious for territorial expansion and self-aggrandizement. Many city-states and provinces weaponized the religious fervor of the reformation and counter-reformation to gain territory and political advantage. But, in the wake of such cynicism of faith, the result was widespread devastation, carnage, and poverty.

Strasbourg stood in stark contrast to this political science. Situated strategically on the Rhine, the city was at a crossroad of trade and economic expansion. It was a free imperial city with a thriving middle class engaged in crafts, trade, and, with its own mint, banking.

As a free city, it had a defensive system adequate to protect against limited conflict, but not strong enough to repel the military juggernaut of Louis XIV. From its structure of government, the city openly encouraged the participation of all faiths and even had a power-sharing arrangement between the Lutherans and Catholics.

While it is true that Calvinists and Jews were not a part of this political structure, it is also true that unlike other locales, they were tolerated and allowed to generally participate in the business of the city under the protection of its laws. Another mitigating factor against sectarian violence was that Martin Bucer, proclaimed by some to be the father of ecumenism, had been an influential cleric there. Bucer was the consummate “big tent” protestant, looking for common ground with all faiths and advocating forbearance in a sea of bigotry.

The stability of Strasbourg economically, politically, and culturally created great prosperity for its citizens. It was a thriving medieval community, which made it the crown jewel of the area and an object of conquest for the French king. The value of the city located at the confluence of the Rhine and Ill rivers made it ideal for an outpost on the eastern border of France to serve as an early warning system against invasion.

For years, Louis and his generals coveted the city as an addition to the expanding empire of the Sun King. But rather than pursue siege and armed conflict, Louis wisely engaged in deft diplomacy effectively charming the city but with the threat of force implicit in his affections.

Annexing Strasbourg by negotiation would not only provide an economic benefit but would also serve as an example to other surrounding cities that Louis’ ruthless reputation was undeserved, and he was a reasonable despot. This diplomatic approach gave Louis a sphere of influence to neutralize otherwise hostile cities and encourage acceptance, if not allegiance, to his cause.

So, in September 1681, Louis occupied Strasbourg without a shot fired in anger and incorporated the city into his realm. Reaching an acceptable accommodation with the various centers of power in the city was easily accomplished when it was clear that French occupation would not change the law of the land.

Louis did require that the Cathedral of Our Lady be returned to exclusive Catholic worship. Previously, several churches were used by various faiths to worship at alternating times on Sunday. But, while Louis favored his Catholic faith, unlike his other conquests where all other sects were banned and members exiled, he allowed Strasbourg to continue to follow its longstanding tradition of religious toleration.

Strasbourg thus remained faithful to Louis and to the French. While its initial language was primarily German, over time this changed as the city embraced a distinctive French culture. However, from 1871 it was caught between the imperial aims of Germany and France in three wars, changing boundaries by conquest and negotiated settlement until finally after World War II it was re-incorporated into France.

Thanks in large part to Louis’ largess, Strasbourg remained a thriving commercial center and also a center for religious tolerance. This tolerance was an unintentional consequence of understanding the importance of commercial interest and the prosperity occasioned by stability in all aspects of city life.

Nation builders, newlyweds and community organizers would do well to follow Louis’ example and moderate changes of local customs to advocate acceptance, toleration and freedom of conscience. It is no wonder that when Europe sought a location for its Court of Human Rights, Strasbourg was a logical choice.

Will Sellers is a 1985 graduate of Hillsdale College and an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court of Alabama. He is best reached at jws@willsellers.com

Major automobile manufacturers are going all-in on the transition to electric vehicles (EVs). Like all Americans, Alabamians are hearing more about EVs, seeing more models they’d actually want to drive, and assessing what actual benefits EVs could offer.

Just like the price of flat screen televisions fell dramatically as the technology improved and manufacturing capacity increased, EV technology has advanced to the point automakers are introducing many new electric models for mass production. Newer EV models have much longer range and better performance than the original models that could only travel about 50 miles on a charge. Some battery (BEV) or plug-in hybrid vehicle (PHEV) models start in the $20,000 price range and purchasers can be eligible for a federal tax credit of up to $7,500.

An EV owner who decides to install an affordable charger at home to top off their battery overnight will quickly feel the impact in their pocketbook due to the low and steady cost of electricity as a transportation fuel. In fact, charging at home at night will cut your monthly driving fuel cost by more than one half when compared to gasoline.

Electric vehicles also require less maintenance than gasoline-powered vehicles because they require no oil changes. EV owners no longer have to worry about a transmission, valves, starters, clutches or catalytic converters needing replacement because these parts don’t exist on an electric vehicle.

Ford, as an example, estimates scheduled maintenance costs will be 40% lower for its F-150 Lightning pick-up when compared to its gasoline counterpart.

Those savings – fuel, maintenance and the federal tax credit – can add up quickly. Money matters.

But don’t just trust me. You can see for yourself at three upcoming National Drive Electric Week EVents co-sponsored by the Alabama Clean Fuels Coalition – Saturday, Sept. 25 in Huntsville; Wednesday, Sept. 29 in Auburn; and Saturday, Oct. 2 at Pepper Place in Birmingham. You can learn more by visiting the calendar page on www.alabamacleanfuels.com.

Nothing beats kicking the tires and talking to real-life EV owners who can tell you about cruising past gas stations and charging overnight. They can tell you why the newest electric models’ high torque, even at low speeds, translates to instant accelerator response and makes them fun to drive. They can tell you about the personal satisfaction of driving a car with no tailpipe emissions. You’ll probably also hear excitement about the state’s efforts through ADECA to significantly expand EV infrastructure.

If it hasn’t happened already, you will soon be sitting at a red light and catch yourself admiring a new car before realizing it is an EV just as the light turns green and it zooms away from your gasoline powered vehicle. By the end of next year, you will see this happening with pick-up trucks!

Ford announced plans earlier this year to invest $22 billion in electric vehicles through 2025, and the iconic American brand will also begin selling its all-electric F-150 Lightning pick-up next year.

General Motors announced plans to offer 30 new electric vehicles by 2025, part of a $27 billion investment in EVs. For Chevy truck drivers like me, the Silverado EV model is expected to be available starting in 2023.

Automobile manufacturing provides plenty of high-paying jobs to thousands of Alabamians, and supporting the growth of advanced vehicle manufacturing in Alabama is a great way to keep more of our talented college graduates from going to another state to pursue a career.

When you’re in the market for your next car or truck, an electric vehicle will likely be a more affordable and viable option than ever. The upcoming National Drive Electric Week EVents provide an easy way to learn more about EVs and make you more knowledgeable when it’s time to buy a new car.

Don’t miss your chance to learn more.

Michael Staley has served as president of the Alabama Clean Fuels Coalition since 2020.

About the Alabama Clean Fuels Coalition

Alabama Clean Fuels Coalition serves as the principal coordinating point for clean, alternative fuel and advanced technology vehicle activities in Alabama. ACFC was incorporated in 2002 as an Alabama 501c3 non-profit, received designation U.S. Department of Energy’s Clean Cities program in 2009 and was re-designated in 2014. A national network of nearly 100 Clean Cities coalitions brings together stakeholders in the public and private sectors to deploy alternative and renewable fuels, idle-reduction measures, fuel economy improvements and emerging transportation technologies. To learn more, visit www.alabamacleanfuels.com.

The Alabama Association of Nurse Anesthetists (ALANA) stands with the Medical Association of the State of Alabama in objecting to the pause in the access to monoclonal antibody treatments for COVID-19 patients in Alabama.

Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists (CRNAs) not only provide anesthesia care for COVID-19 patients, but as airway experts, intubate patients in Alabama and across the United States when the condition of the patient deteriorates to the point of requiring mechanical ventilation in order to stay alive.

“With over 2,000 patients still hospitalized in Alabama, and an intensive care bed shortfall, any treatment that is available to patients with COVID that would deflect or deter the need for our services should be implemented without delay,” stated Willie Furr, DNP, CRNA, ALANA president.

The ALANA is an organization that strives for access to quality health care and we hope the voices of health care providers are heard. Patients need access to hospitals for treatment for other disease processes beyond just COVID, and thus, any proven treatment for COVID that may keep them from hospitalization or becoming seriously ill should be pursued with vigor.

The United States is a relatively young country, but we have the oldest written national constitution. On this Constitution Day, we honor this incredible document, which has persisted for over two centuries and inspired a host of other constitutions around the world.

Today marks the 234th anniversary of the signing of the Constitution. Our Constitution has endured for so long thanks to a combination of unique features. As I discussed last year, one of the most important features is the way the Constitution divides power — both among the three branches of the federal government and between the federal government and the 50 states. Another key feature is its protection of individual rights. Several prominent members of the founding generation believed that no legitimate law of the land could exist without specific, written guarantees of individual liberties. Their conviction eventually inspired the first ten amendments to the Constitution, known as the Bill of Rights.

The Bill of Rights begins with the First Amendment, which enshrines rights that are most fundamental to a free society, among them the freedom of religion and the freedom of speech. By protecting these essential liberties, the First Amendment affirms the right of every citizen to worship God in accordance with his conscience and to freely speak his mind.

The Second Amendment, which recognizes the right of citizens to keep and bear arms, enables the American public to protect the rights spelled out in the First Amendment — and in all the other amendments that come after it. As George Mason, one of the principal advocates for a federal bill of rights, explained in 1774, an armed and capable citizenry is “necessary to protect our ancient laws and liberty” from tyranny. History’s most brutal dictators all rose to power while presiding over unarmed subjects: neither Stalin, nor Hitler, nor Mao, faced significant armed civilian resistance. By guaranteeing American citizens the right to defend themselves, the Second Amendment ensures that our nation will always have a check against despotism, both foreign and domestic.

The next eight amendments in the Bill of Rights list additional protections of individual freedoms. For example, the Fourth Amendment guards the right to be free from unreasonable searches or seizures, and the Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishments. And the last of the original amendments, the 10th, protects both individual citizens and the states in which they live from federal overreach. It accomplishes this by affirming that any powers not granted to the federal government are “reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

These protections of liberty are among the most remarkable in the world. But we must not take them for granted. As history shows us, merely codifying rights on paper is not enough. Libya’s constitution, for example, guarantees its citizens numerous “human fundamental rights and freedoms,” including “equal civil and political rights,” yet Libya remains plagued by an active slave trade, pervasive governmental corruption, and a litany of other human-rights abuses. North Korea has its own bill of rights, which rings equally hollow.

The reason America’s guarantee of rights has succeeded where others’ have failed is because our Bill of Rights is reinforced by a strict separation of powers, a federalist structure containing fifty sovereign states, and the liberty-loving spirit of the American people. As long as we hold fast to these principles and maintain our defense of liberty, we will be able to celebrate Constitution Day for centuries to come.

Jay Mitchell is an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama

It is obvious that someone in the White House needs to remind Joseph R. Biden that he is the President of the United States and not a third-world dictator.

Like many Americans, I was outraged when President Biden mandated that companies with 100 or more employees require vaccination or subject unvaccinated employees to weekly testing. Neither the U.S. Constitution nor the U.S. Code allow the President to unilaterally compel tens of millions of Americans to follow his personal demands because his patience is “wearing thin.” While I believe that vaccines are effective and safe, it is equally important to remember that every American must retain his or her right to make his or her own healthcare choices. If the government can compel millions of private-sector workers to take a vaccine against their wishes, then what can the government mandate next?

Past statements, made by White House officials, prove that they know perfectly well that the President’s mandate is ill-advised and unconstitutional. In December, President-elect Biden stated, “No, I don’t think it should be mandatory; I wouldn’t demand it be mandatory.” On July 23, 2021, press secretary Jen Psaki speaking about vaccine mandates said, “That’s not the role of the federal government.” Since these comments were made nothing has changed, except the Biden administration’s need to shift the public’s attention. The administration does not want the public focusing on its failed COVID policy, the disaster at our southern border, or the botched execution of the withdrawal of our troops from Afghanistan.

What should concern every American is President Biden’s use of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to implement his mandate. Allowing federal bureaucrats to trample the individual rights of millions of Americans by administrative edict is a troubling prospect. President Biden’s actions provide for no accountability or credible legislative oversight, and if this precedent is set, then the presidency will become nothing more than a revolving door of term-limited dictators.

Even OSHA’s own standards would not justify President Biden’s emergency rules. In his speech, President Biden acknowledged that the risk of serious illness was extremely low for vaccinated individuals. Meaning anybody in the workplace can protect themselves from “grave danger” by getting vaccinated. In the absence of any grave danger, which is required under OSHA rules for temporary emergency standards, there is no justification for President Biden’s new standards.

Additionally, President Biden’s edict is unscientific and it is bad public policy. The administration creates no exception of individuals who have natural immunity and possess antibodies. Despite the fact that a recent study from Israel found that those who have recovered from COVID-19 have considerably more protection from the Delta variant than those who have received the Pfizer vaccine. Natural immunity is a well-established scientific principle. What scientific information lead the administration not to provide an exception for the millions of unvaccinated who have already contracted the disease?

President Biden’s mandate will only further entrench vaccine skeptics. Someone who has refused the vaccine will not suddenly change their mind because the federal government presents them with a choice between keeping their jobs or getting vaccinated. Vaccine skeptics will assert that President Biden’s mandate is proof positive that the government’s vaccine campaign is more about control than genuine public health concerns, especially skeptics who have previously contracted the disease and possess natural immunity.

In 1964, Ronald Reagan delivered his famous speech, A Time for Choosing. Reagan declared, “You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between left or right. Well, I’d like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There’s only an up or down.” Today, our nation again has been presented with a choice. Will we submit to the whims of an out-of-touch tyrant? Or will we reject irrational, emotional, fear-based thinking and develop a rational plan to remain the greatest country in the history of the world? I have already made my choice, and I hope you will join me.

John H. Merrill is currently serving as Alabama’s 53rd secretary of state

To my own embarrassment, a recent event afforded me a few moments to do something I had not done in quite some time–contemplate the words and meaning of our National Anthem.

Invited to sing our anthem at the Marion County School System teacher in-service event in August, I actually listened to the words for the first time in what seemed an eternity. As the words flowed across my lips and those in attendance stood at attention, the words had meaning like never before.

Patriotic to the core, I often find myself crying silently, as the anthem is played prior to sporting events. But this time was unique. There was an emotion which pierced my spirit in a manner I had never known. My country was in trouble and in this moment, it seemed critical that I understand the meaning of the words. There was a part of me longing to connect with the one who penned those beautiful words more than 200 years before.

Francis Scott Key originally drafted the words we now know as our anthem as a poem. From the water, he watched as the British bombarded Ft. McHenry in Maryland in September 1814. He was struck by the resiliency of this banner and those who were fighting to defend it. More than 100 years later, the poem had been set to music and the combination was officially adopted as the National Anthem.

For those who will indulge this nostalgic old soul, take a moment to reflect on these words and the mixture of fear, uncertainty and pride Key must have experienced as what would eventually prove to be our anthem flowed from his pen:

“Oh say can you see, by the dawn’s early light . . . ‘’ Imagine his wonderment as the first evidence of dawn crawled over the eastern sky to find our nation’s flag still flying proudly in the Maryland sky. Less than two generations after a nation of farmers and visionaries defeated the British to earn our independence, here we were again staring down the same foe.

“What so proudly we hailed at the twilight’s last gleaming . . . ‘’ Even in those horrific hours, the author felt pride in a young nation and the banner which represented its cause for freedom and liberty. Simply seeing the banner wave high was reason for celebration, as the outcome of the War of 1812 was still very uncertain at this time.

“Whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight . . .’’ Look at two key words in this line. Broad and bright. Key could have simply stated stripes and stars but he chose to describe each with these two specific adjectives–broad and bright. To me, the word broad signifies the strength of our nation and the principles upon which it was founded. The word bright reflects the hope one longs to see in reference to the world’s beacon of liberty and freedom. These ideals are what our nation has represented to the world since its inception. While others struggle to find liberty even today, our nation is the reminder such freedom is possible.

“O’er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming. . . ‘’ In military terms, a rampart is simply a defensive wall. And from the sea, Key could still clearly see our banner waving high above this defensive wall. In fact, the author described the manner in which the banner waved as gallantly. By definition, gallant means in a “brave or heroic manner.’’ In essence, Key attributed human-like characteristics to our flag. In this line, one can almost envision our American flag waving amidst the turmoil, death and destruction below with iron-like valor. He describes our flag as if it possessed the qualities of a man–brave, resilient and undeterred.

“And the rockets’ red glare, the bombs bursting in air . . . ‘’ This line is yet another descriptive passage reminding those of us who would come generations later of the battle waging above and below. In the impenetrable darkness, the light created by the cascading bombing and canon fire were enough for those at sea to continue a focus on the banner. In the midst of chaos, the American flag continued to wave as a reminder to each involved the priceless value of what was being defended.

“Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there . . . ‘’ Again. Over and over. Key reminded all, and maybe in that moment, more importantly himself, that the banner was still flying high. Despite the bloodshed and the mounting odds against an American victory in this war, this banner, our banner, was still above reproach.
“Oh say does that Star-Spangled Banner yet wave, o’er the land of the free and the home of the brave?’’
And yet, herein lies the most critical question our nation faces today. Does this banner still wave over our land? Does the republic it represents still honor and cherish it as before?
To many, the banner now represents oppression, yet to me it still represents the land of opportunity. To some, the banner is nothing more than a prop to be used in making a political statement or to be tread upon or burned in times of anger. Not to me. This banner remains special and unique, the only one of its kind in global history. Even with its flaws, the nation has welcomed the masses for generations in an effort to provide a new beginning.

There are those who seem to curse our flag, yet still choose to rest safely under her protection. Many of the same regularly demean our nation yet still choose to reap the benefits of living here. May we allow these words and the time invested in reading serve to remind us of the blessings we enjoy daily simply by being born in America. I have no doubt these United States were created through divine intervention. God had and continues to have a mission for our land, if only we will accept it.

My penning these few words will never serve to heal the wounds currently crippling our nation. But maybe taking the time to reflect on the words so many of us take for granted could offer a new reason for hope.

Tracy Estes is Alabama State House District 17’s freshman state representative from Winfield.

The notion that one cannot be an advocate for both women and unborn children is simply wrong. Those that pit women against their unborn babies are not advancing solutions, but instead making these children the unjustified scapegoats when we could be making real, meaningful progress, not only for the women of today but also of tomorrow. No doubt, that includes those unborn baby girls. If we truly want to continue taking steps forward for women’s rights, let’s empower women and be a voice for unborn children.

In 1973, before our country had even seen a woman serve on the U.S. Supreme Court, Roe. v. Wade was decided, but the debate would fiercely continue. Nearly fifty years later, the people of Alabama and folks around the country hold this issue with such high importance that they put candidates in offices ranging from the White House to their State Legislature based on their willingness to fight for life. Here in Alabama, we will continue this fight until all unborn children are protected once and for all.

Nearly five decades after Roe v. Wade – and we are still fighting this fight.

Many will soon be turning their attention to the abortion case the Supreme Court is hearing this fall: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. I recently joined on an amicus brief with 11 of my fellow governors urging the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade and restore the authority of states to protect lives of unborn children. This case out of Mississippi not only matters to Mississippi, it matters to Alabama, Texas and all 50 states because at the end of the day, people’s interests should be and are protected through their elected legislators and governors.

Here in Alabama, we have a deeply held belief that every life is precious and that every life is a sacred gift from God.

Many Americans, myself included, disagreed when Roe v. Wade was handed down in 1973, and in those almost five decades since, so much has changed. We have made incredible advancements – in areas from medicine to the workplace – much of which has to do with women. Since Roe, the viability marker has moved from 28 weeks to 22 weeks, and we can only expect science will further advance that. Women are very much a force in the workplace thanks to shifts in policy and culture. It should be commonplace we see mothers in places like the Supreme Court or in CEO posts. During the pandemic, nurses and teachers, fields dominated by women, were on the frontlines for us. In 2019, for the first time, women made up a majority of law students entering class at The University of Alabama School of Law. The list goes on. We have seen increased paid leave help retain mothers in the workforce. A little more than two years ago in Alabama, I signed the equal pay act into law to help fight any pay disparity. Women no longer have to make a choice between motherhood and a career.

As I like to say, sometimes the best man for a job is a woman. So, why is it that those who are not pro-life continue to say women can’t do both? It’s time we drop that ultimatum.

Being pro-life is being pro-women. As long as I am governor, Alabama will continue forging a path for women and the unborn.

Kay Ivey is the 54th governor of Alabama.