Latest News, Top Stories & Analysis 카지노사이트 l 바카라사이트 l 온라인카지노 l 안전한카지노사이트

Tag: Politics


How to Inspire Young People to Engage in Politics

Ask young people if they would ever consider running for office and this is what you will hear:

  • Politicians are just liars.
  • Most politicians are hypocrites. People in politics are hypocritical.
  • It’s about lying, cheating, doing anything. That’s not how I want to spend my time.
  • I don’t even want to think about a political career. I would rather have milk than run for office.

These are not theoretical answers. Those are just a few of the more than 4,000 high school students we interviewed in research for our new book, Running from Office: Why Young Americans Are Turned to Politics. Having grown up in a political environment characterized by racism, gridlock, gridlock and scandal, the majority of 13- to 25-year-olds view the political system as a dead end. good, broken and fair. As a result, nine out of ten people will not even think of running for office. They will choose to spend their lives doing something else. This should raise alarm about the health of democracy. The United States has more than half a million elective positions.

Most of the people who become candidates for office do not save their lives without thinking about politics, they wake up one morning and decide to throw their hat in the ring. This idea has been widespread for a long time, often since childhood. In the final chapter of the book, we offer a set of recommendations that can boost political will and help shape new trends. Here, we summarize three of them. These are all large-scale efforts that will require significant investment and deep commitment from government officials, entrepreneurs, educators and activists. But everyone has the power to change the attitude of the youth towards politics. At the very least, we hope to spark a national conversation about how to show the next generation that politics isn’t just about misbehaving men in capital cities.

1. Creating the YouLead Initiative

Since John F. Kennedy signed the law in 1961 establishing the Peace Corps, the organization has sent hundreds of thousands of Americans abroad “to meet the most pressing needs of the people of the world.” . AmeriCorps has mobilized 800,000 Americans to meet similar housing needs. And Teach for America has recruited thousands of citizens to “build the movement to eliminate educational inequality.” Together, these programs send a strong signal that the government values ​​public service and the American public depends on it. If we want to engage the next generation in politics, what better way than to show that running for office is a worthwhile, healthy and positive form of public service? Whether designed as a government program, non-profit organization or business, a two-pronged national campaign – we call it the YouLead initiative – can send a strong signal to young people that running for office is the right way to serve. information people. country, country and world. The first thing will involve the media with the technology that will change the political opinion.

When young people think of government, they conjure up images of self-interested, self-interested people fighting against self-interested, self-interested people. themselves are doing themselves in a system that is broken to the point of paralysis. Focusing on local and state leaders – many of whom are not professional politicians – will mean that more elected leaders care about their country and bring about positive change. In addition, humorous social media posts by parents, teachers, public figures and celebrities encourage young people to think about the future and the political future. the stronger the message.

Second, local and state YouLead organizers can identify high school and college students who have already demonstrated leadership success—those in student government, captains of sports teams, debate teams and simulation teams. experiments, participants in sports and music clubs. At regional conferences, they will be encouraged to apply their leadership skills to electoral politics. The program can contribute to their competitive spirit by organizing a national conference to which regional participants can apply.

2. Make Political Education an Important Part of the College Admissions Process

The primary goal for most 12-17 year olds is to attend college (85% of the high school students we interviewed plan to attend). But the five main components of a college application — high school grades, standardized test scores, extracurricular activities, personal essays, and letters of recommendation — allow students to apply and be accepted even more famously. a school without political interest or knowledge. Can’t find Iraq on the map? It’s good. Don’t know the name of the vice president? It’s not too bad. Not sure which political party controls Congress? Don’t worry. Why not integrate political power into the college application process, such as new materials for the SAT or ACT, alternative tests, or essays on public affairs? The car is almost an accessory.

What is important is that it will force young people to take news and political information seriously. Combining college acceptance, even modestly, with political consciousness can pay off. We found that young people who are more involved in politics – at home, at school, with their friends and through the media – are more likely to run for office. In fact, they see the same negative side of modern politics as anyone else. But they also see examples of good politicians, elected officials solving problems, and ambitious, honest people trying to improve their country. The habit of talking to politicians may fade once students apply to college, but that may not be the case.

There is nothing wrong with colleges and universities taking the position that in order for students to be successful, it is important for students to connect with the world around them. In fact, a similar process has created the idea of ​​volunteering among many high school students. With about 75% of high school students doing some form of community service, many begin these efforts in hopes of “impressing” college admissions officers.

Related Article: Morrison is Hoping for an Unexpected Result in the Election, but ‘uncommitted’ Voters Seldom Change Their Minds in the Last Week

3. Create a GoRun App:

We live in the age of the app. You can upload photos, request an Uber, find cheap plane tickets, find the nearest Mexican restaurant, or listen to your favorite music with just a tap of an app. Young people do too. 81 percent of people under the age of 25 sleep with their phone next to them in bed; 74% use their phone as the first thing they do when they wake up; and 97% of teenagers regularly use smartphones in the bathroom to check information. There is no activity, time of day or place that is not suitable for youth smartphone and application use. So, let’s take advantage of the digital world the youth live in by creating an app that helps them know the political situation and teach them how to run for them.

Surprisingly, it is very difficult to know the status of elected officials in a country, let alone to determine the duties that belong to each person or the duties that are involved in serving them. There is no central database with this information. The GoRun app will allow users to enter an address and receive a comprehensive list of all elected officials representing the area, from the local school board to the President of the United States.

Clicking on any location will give you a description of the company, the important job group, and information about the tools and regulations required to do the job. Understanding how to become a candidate is up to you. Teachers can easily integrate into their programs. And young people who are not interested in running for office will not get involved in finding out the truth. This easy-to-access information will feature thousands of jobless voting opportunities in Washington, DC.

Our political system has done a lot for young people. This prevented them from running for office, made them not want to be elected, and made them separate from the idea of ​​political work. Designing a new curriculum will be difficult, but being creative about how we do it is our only choice.

politics in europe

Is Europe Headed in the Right Direction?

What is shaking European politics. In September, Italy elected populist Giorgia Meloni, who on Friday became the country’s first right-wing leader since wartime Mussolini.

The day before the right-wing Swedish Nationalist Democrats held an election, winning 20.5% of the vote in a poll of concerns about violence and immigration. Although there are a few exceptions – a European liberal recently ousted a populist candidate for the presidency of Austria – these two examples show that it is possible to revive a populist in Europe, in popular populist elections in Bulgaria, Switzerland. , Czech Republic and Finland. 5 Reasons To Play at Online Casinos

So what is happening in European politics? Sam Van der Staak of the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) says: “What we are seeing is the rise of anti-establishment groups that promise something very different.”

“Right, left is a misrepresentation, it’s really about citizens expressing their disinterest in politics and what the whole system of government has to offer.”

A difficult concept to define, populism is a political system that pits the “common people” against the “elite”. The term got its name in 2016 from the British Brexit vote and the election of Donald Trump.

Populism is now “improving to some extent,” says van der Staak. “At that time, we were all afraid of the populists taking power, but this time, I did not read so much anger about the elections in Italy or Sweden.”

“A New Political Party”

One reason is that some of the political positions of populist parties across Europe and the political center have converged, van der Staak argues.

“Strong views on immigration have been welcomed,” he told Euronews, noting that many populist parties have also abandoned their opposition to the European Union. “A few years ago, it was populists on the right and the left who were calling for the overthrow of the fundamentals. Now we see a kind that falls somewhere in the middle. 카지노사이트

Future Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, a former critic of the EU, repeatedly stated before the election that the Brothers of Italy party was not against Europe. Another “important” reason for populism in Europe for van der Staak is that “the current political system is not working”.

“For a long time, the social security system could not provide […] and the traditional authorities could not provide solutions to social problems,” he says, citing the problems of the meeting Parliament and polarization across Europe. The UK, traditionally seen as a stable country, will see its fourth prime minister in three years this week as parliament has been in turmoil for years over the Brexit vote.

“We need to keep an eye on them”
Behind the concern about populism in Europe is the question of what populist parties will do once in power. “What we have to watch,” says van der Staak, “are these anti-establishment things that happen once in power.”

“Will they rule fairly or will they go too far?” He refused.

According to a forthcoming report by IDEA, shared with Euronews, almost 70% of what it calls European democracies are at risk of democratic collapse in 2021, where 60% of democracies are destroyed. Three of them – Poland, Hungary and Slovenia – are described by IDEA as ‘backsliding’, meaning that politicians and governments have been ‘restricted and deliberate’ in their democratic processes.

Right-wing political parties have taken power in three eastern European states, despite losing Slovenia’s Janez Janša, who has been compared to Trump in this year’s election. Budapest and Warsaw are still arguing with Brussels about the return of their democratic freedoms at home.

‘I Do Not Think So’

But others don’t think Europe is moving towards right-wing populism. Brett Meyer, a researcher at the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, said, “It’s true that right-wing populists have been successful in a few countries. “But not in many others.” “Look at Germany, they elected the most boring person in the world,” he added, referring to other election victories in France and Austria. “There are big questions about the revival of populism.” Meyer is also skeptical about drawing comparisons with Europe, pointing out how recent elections in Italy and Sweden are “completely different from each other”.

In Sweden, the vote is about crime and immigration, while Meyer says that in Italy “the story is about the weakness and fragmentation of the left”.

Politics Civil Military

CIVILIAN AND STATE: Politics at the Heart of Civil-Military Relations

In September 2022, a significant event happened: War on the Rocks released an open letter on civil relations with the US military of almost all the Secretaries of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The letter is important not only for what it said, but also for what it did not say – and, above all, what it could not say. It revealed how little we know about civilian and military-civil relations and how the exclusion of the working class from politics undermines our ability to protect the military from politics.

Like many documents on civil-military relations, and although signed by 8 secretaries of defense, the letter looks at war. 10 of his 16 talks about what the military can and cannot do during presidential elections and revolutions, the relationship between the military and law enforcement, the relationship between the military and the politics of politics and how the military “reinforced civilian control.” Even the evidence that describes what civilians do does not explain how they do it, only what the military can and cannot do in response. The point about the law is not about what good and legal law looks like, but about the fact that the law, although legal, should be obeyed. The perception of the recipient is important here.

To be clear, the letter does not ignore common duties. Similarly, the first points are related to the control of the common people and how it is organized in the American government. In the text, “civilian-military groups” and “military-civilian leaders” are clear subjects of best practices. Although the main focus is on the military, one can argue that the common people should know what the military should do and their orders. On the one hand, the letter describes how the control of the common people is, or at least what it produces. Therefore, the letter was not aimed at ordinary people. But if ordinary people are part of the target group of students, what do teachers expect them to learn about what they should do? Where is the Line That Separates Journalism From Politics?

If, for example, the revelation about General Mark Milley was part of the motivation for the letter, then an explanation of what ordinary people should do differently – initially or in response – would be useful. But that’s not what we get. This article explains that the people’s control is organized as a democratic system. “Ultimately, the will of the American people is used to control civilian administration as demonstrated by the election,” the letter said. This is both true and not a big deal. Elections are indeed an important response system to democracy, giving ordinary people the power they need to control the military.

But this is only a predicate – a necessary but not sufficient condition according to the owner’s manual. And then, there is no manual for civilians, because the current work in civil and military relations does not provide one. The letter went as far as possible with our current standards and knowledge. Elections determine who will rule, but not exactly what they should do or how they should do it. Voters delegate their decisions about policies or exercise decision-making power to the common people. 카지노사이트

How will elected officials and their political representatives at the Pentagon keep voters’ minds on day-to-day choices, such as requiring the secretary to approve the war veteran’s plan before the secretary his body? Why would a Senator vote against recommending a soldier for promotion to General or One-Star Admiral? Specifically, and of course just as important, when the President of the United States is proposing the use of military force against American citizens protesting in the streets of America, what should the Secretary of Defense do?

What should the president’s party do in Congress? But when the crowd attacked the members of Congress, what role should the army play in protecting them? These are political questions about political choices. And for all the wisdom of American law and the concept of civil-military relations, these measures have little to say about politics.

As Risa Brooks explains in her 2020 essay, “Paradoxes of Professionalism: Rethinking Civil-Military Relations in the United States,” we have to blame Samuel Huntington for why politics is a neglected part of the study and practice of civil-military relations. Brooks explains that in his 1957 book, The Soldier and the State, Huntington described the relationship between the country and the military as an exchange between two different societies with two different influences. Civilians control politics and leave the military to their skills. Huntington supported the principle of “political forces” in the United States, which, according to Brooks, “shapes how American workers relate to their professional work.” The letter supports this principle, stressing the need to “separate the military from the politics of politics”.

But somehow, perhaps because the army is a more cohesive institution and therefore easier to treat as a unit of analysis for academic studies, practitioners of civil-military relations do as always as as if the whole relationship has an apolitical position. The result of avoiding politics in a war-torn country is that we don’t know much about what ordinary people need to do to manage politics so that the military doesn’t.

You can see this challenge in the way recent defense secretaries talk about their relationship with politics. Robert Gates expresses genuine distaste for his time as Secretary of Defense. Referring to his arrival in the State of the Union address, Gates said, “Being a part of a political group that I am ashamed of, especially praising the plans and ideas of countries that are controversial.” Jim Mattis, while campaigning for his own book, has insisted that his role as retired executive director is to stay out of politics — not questioning whether his latest role as secretary of defense includes policies that like that. In February 2020, Secretary Mark Esper issued a memo to all defense officials, military and civilians, which said, “We are continuing the DoD’s long tradition of remaining apolitical. In June of this year that, Esper told Politico, “I do everything I can to try to stay political and to try to stay out of situations that might seem political.”

Of course, defense secretaries are politicians. They are appointed by the president, political parties and authorities. As for the more civilian employees of the Ministry of Defense, although they are subject to the Hatch Act, which prevents active support for the “success or failure” of political parties the government or the candidates, they don’t stop them like soldiers. Civilians are also not barred from other political activities such as defending the defense budget or discussing public opinion about military operations with White House officials or members of Congress. But as Esper’s letter shows, the idea that the military should be politicized started with the idea that the entire defense department should pretend to be politicized.

A big part of the problem is the complexity of politics and politics. While political politics involves the pursuit of power for a political party, governmental politics is about institutions and actors in the government striving for power, leading and to choose policies, direct resources and organizations and programs. The difference between politics and politics is especially dangerous for the secretary, whose job is to promote the president’s political agenda as a member of the party.

Other MoD appointees are in a similar position. Although they are forced to work on political campaigns for political companies, they are actively involved in politics. Part of the difficulty is that accepting politics these days can seem unnatural.

Consider the negative interpretation of many people who say that it is the idea of ​​”politics”, of politics or something else. “I don’t want to be political” is a common way for someone to reassure the listener that they are not trying to be controversial or offensive. Playing politics isn’t just bad for the military; and it’s not good. At the same time, the proliferation of politics in the United States has developed around the desire of supporters to see themselves as honest and to see their politicians as -not good.

The belief that politics in general is a bad thing, but that human politics is only common sense has led many soldiers to believe that their thinking is not political but moral. This is, I believe, the reason why many soldiers have become involved in politics in recent years as they continue to think that they cannot be involved in politics.


Where is the Line That Separates Journalism From Politics?

A North Platte, Nebraska television broadcaster was recently fired for political involvement. This raises serious questions about journalism and politics. What can a journalist do in his life? What rights do they give up? And, more than a sign? According to news reports, Melanie Standiford has been fired as a news anchor and anchor for KNOP-TV in North Platte after getting signatures on a petition calling for her city to become a sanctuary city for unborn children.

The petition, one of many similar in Nebraska, calls for the issue to be on the ballot in November. According to local reports, Standiford agreed to collect bequests at his church. When his superiors found out about the news, they immediately fired him, saying that journalists “are not allowed to be involved in politics at any time and under any circumstances.” their beliefs, involvement in politics for a candidate, party or election”.

Standiford told the newspaper that she is pro-life but has always been candid about the issue. So where is the line? I know journalists who refuse to vote out of fear that the nomination process will limit their ability to report accurately. During my career, I have voluntarily given up things that most Americans are free to do, such as making political donations, signing papers, or attending rallies. However, voting is a secret and, in my opinion, an important part of being an American 카지노사이트. I always vote.

But my wife will tell you that I drew clearly from any other politics. He had a career in politics as a candidate and school principal. While our neighbors are waving their campaign signs, our backyard is empty. His family photo in the brochure showed just him and our three children, not me. Sometimes he looks at my orders, but he respects them. I want to be so far from the line that no one can accuse me of crossing it. Of course, every reporter can draw the line differently. There are a lot of gray areas, but the Nebraska legend has clearly crossed paths.

The New York Times now adds a sidebar to the political story that explains “How Times reporters cover politics.” It reads, in part, “Thus, while Times reporters may vote, they are not permitted to endorse or broadcast for political parties or causes.” The policy prohibits campaign contributions and public appearances. Not only is this politically savvy, but it is a good thing for The Times to be clear about politics for the readers, instead of assuming they know about it, especially at a very political time.

For most journalists, the rules are clear but sometimes questions arise. We encourage employees to get involved in their communities, but let us know if any red flags come up. Is it okay to volunteer on the church board? Is it good to be in a video for United Way? Often the answer is “it depends”. But the rule is “no surprise”. If a member of staff has a question about their involvement, it is important to speak to management so that we can consider it first. For news consumers, it should be reassuring that there are newsrooms with clear ethical standards and that you can trust them to uphold the law.

For Nebraska’s licensed television news anchor, it seems the red flag either didn’t appear in his mind, or he just ignored it. He should have discussed it with his boss before collecting signatures. The station is owned by a large corporation with more than 100 TV stations across the country. They won’t let their ethics waver when a reporter crosses the line. A Slice of North Carolina’s Casino Profits Go to Political Relatives

His dismissal sends a clear message to thousands of other journalists: stay so far away from the line that your charges cannot cross it. And if you don’t know where the line is, talk to your manager before that red flag becomes a red flag at your job.

Related article: Online poker – What Do Those Stats Really Mean?


A Slice of North Carolina’s Casino Profits Go to Political Relatives

A company profiting from North Carolina’s new tribal casino has offered family members of politicians and high-ranking politicians. As supporters of the casino seeking federal approval for the project, according to an interview with the Wall Street Journal.

One of the stakes is John B. Clyburn, the brother of Representative James Clyburn, a powerful Democratic senator from South Carolina introduced legislation in Congress last year that cleared the way for the new Catawba Two Kings casino.

Other controversy went to Michael Haley, husband of former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley, a Republican who served in the Trump administration as ambassador to the United Nations; Butch Bowers, the attorney who represented both Ms. Haley and former President Donald Trump; and Patti Solis Doyle, a Democratic politician who helped manage the 2008 campaign for Hillary Clinton and then-presidential nominee Joe Biden, according to the document.

The draw, made indirectly by another company, gave each of the recipients a slice of a snowmobile rental company called Kings Mountain Equipment Supply LLC, whose principals include sponsors casinos or their members, according to the document 카지노사이트. The company receives 20 cents on every dollar of profit the casino makes from the hundred slot machines. These amounts are small – well under 1% ownership for each recipient, according to the document. Those involved deny any quid pro quo. Still, ethics lawyers say the arrangement raises questions about the legitimacy of those seeking government assistance in providing financial incentives to relatives of public employees in exchange for is to influence policy.

The casino, which has been considered a long-term plan, will open on a temporary basis in July 2021 after a federal program to help the Catawba Indian Nation, a tribe of about 3,600 members with a 1,000-acre reservation nearby in Rock Hill, SC.

The tribe was banned from offering gambling on its property and tried for nearly a decade to open a casino across the border in North Carolina, where it has no reserves. The Trump administration’s Interior Department initially rejected the Catawba casino project, then approved it in 2020 에볼루션게이밍.

When the bill of Rep. Clyburn became law, upholding the abortion decision, and ending threats from another tribe that once owned North Carolina’s only casinos .

The Catawba project in Kings Mountain, North Carolina, is a differentiator among Indian casinos, said Steven Light, an expert on tribal gaming at the University of North Dakota, “in the degree of political involvement, involvement in Congress, the time it took. , and the unusual manner in which the decision of the Department of the Interior was overturned.

John Clyburn, in an interview, said that he considered the project from time to time for ten years and let his supporters know different people. He said he didn’t remember talking to anyone in control of the casino.

“I think I discussed” the project with his brother, John Clyburn, said, adding that he received a license allowing him to acquire a small plant in the company connected to the Catawba casino in early September 2013. . This is one week after the Catawba Tribe asked the federal government to approve the casino operation.

John Clyburn said he was surprised to start receiving checks about a year ago, thinking he received seven or eight checks ranging from $600 to $1,300 each. Rep. Clyburn, the third-ranking House Democrat, said he did not know about his brother’s financial interests in casinos and that the couple had not discussed a career in gambling, although they talked daily. He said his support of the bill stems from a long-standing interest in helping the Catawba people right a historical injustice. His grandmother was 50% Catawba, he said. If his brother benefits from a bill he helped pass, Rep. Clyburn said: ‘I don’t care. He manages to earn a living. I don’t get his rights, and I don’t give him mine.

Mr. Haley, through the company he owns, is investigating the physical and cybersecurity issues for the Catawba reservation project and the casino in 2018, and the company is being paid for the plant and the casino, a representative of his company said. His wife was a UN ambassador at the time.

Ms. Haley, who opposed the tribe’s efforts to bring gambling to South Carolina when she was governor, attended a casino dress-up event last year. Her office said she did this as a guest of her husband and “refused to participate in any activities related to the event.”

“Amb. Haley does not support casino operations in the Trump administration,” the statement said. The company declined to comment further.

The permanent withdrawal of the casino has been delayed for some time by regulators at the National Indian Gaming Commission, who have raised concerns that outside sponsors are expecting huge profits from the casino. according to those familiar with the matter. Federal law requires that a tribe derive a significant profit from its gambling operations. An NIGC official confirmed the agency has an open investigation but declined to comment.

“To the extent that the NIGC has identified areas of concern, we have made corrections or are now actively working to address those issues,” Catawba Tribe Chairman Bill Harris said in response. Written questions from the Journal. Mr. Harris said most federal officials to move the casino of cases, including “the way” in the public. He said that the casish radio would lead to our poor while he was getting married. “

John Clybur is brief, Mr. Harris, adds that the tribe of the tribe has retained it on the south of South Carolina Democratic Party. “John Clitning is a former political head of his brother since 2004, the federal movie shows. The casino, located about 35 miles west of Charlotte, was full of visitors and doubled its temporary space to 30,000 square feet in December. The developers have plans for a large permanent building with a 29-storey hotel, according to a presentation to the previous western district council. Kings Mountain Equipment Supply, the slots entity, is one of two similar companies created the day after Catawba Casino was approved by the government. The two signed contracts with the tribe to rent slot machines from the casino, with each assigning about half of the casino’s machines, according to documents reviewed by the Journal and a person familiar with the matter. The company has the right to receive 20% of the money that the casino holds when paying the slot players, according to the document and the person familiar with the matter.

The casino now has about 1,000 slot machines. When fully built, it could have up to 5,000, the documents say, meaning payouts to shareholders could increase significantly.

Stakes held by politically connected people have been hidden from public view through multiple layers of corporations and LLCs. Companies controlled by MM. For example, Clyburn and Haley own shares in a company called AGS of North Carolina LLC which itself owns 10.1% in Kings Mountain Equipment Supply, the documents show. “There’s no Clyburn or Haley’s name on the membership roster,” said Martyna Hanusz, who signed documents as a manager of North Carolina’s AGS and several other entities invested in Kings Mountain Equipment. Supply. She declined to comment further. Others with stats on Kings Mountain Equipment Supply, according to a document reviewed by the Journal, include many former North Carolina politicians who support the casino while in office or their relatives. One said his wife invested, while another said he got the share. They refused to deny anything inappropriate.

The Catawba wanted to open a casino, but a 1993 law exempted them from the National Indian Gaming Act, which allows the tribe to open casinos in states like South Carolina that do not allow gambling on the spot. Plans to open a casino in North Carolina, which would require the federal government to take over 17 acres of land in trust for the tribe, began around 2013.

“I was told it was impossible,” said Wallace Cheves, the casino’s outside developer. “A lot of big game companies and tribes think I’m crazy.”

The Interior Department determined in 2018 that it lacked the power to carry out the tribe’s request. Congress became involved after The Catawba resubmitted its application and using a different legal theory.

Mr. Cheves had sat on the National Finance Committee of Senator Graham when he presented himself to the presidency in 2016. The Principate Supporter, said the speaker for Grahlam because it will help the federal government to treat.

When to interact in the country with white chaos and March 2020, the East Barred Deans Cheroluke saved the Koros Cherolina, which has two Carolina. The lawsuit alleges that the casino will be located in the historic Cherokee area and was approved after “backyard business.” The Interior Ministry said in court documents that its decision was legally correct.

In March 2021, representative. Clyburn introduced the Catawba Indian Nation Lands Act which ended this new conflict. The bill passed the House and became part of the $770 billion Defense Authorization Act, an annual item that receives congressional approval. President Biden signed it into law in December 2021.