Striking Boeing machinists agreed to a brand new contract on November 4, 2024. It was negotiated between their union, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, and the country's largest industrial aircraft manufacturer.

members of the union, generally known as IAMreceived a cumulative 43% wage increase over the subsequent 4 years, significant signing bonuses, increased company contributions to employees' 401k plans and a commitment from Boeing to construct its next plane within the Seattle area.

Workers had rejected two previous proposals, demanding higher wages, job security and a return to a conventional pension plan, before backing the third on the eve of Election Day.

Nearly 60% of the roughly 33,000 staff agreed to the contract, ending a strike that had dragged on for nearly seven weeks, crippling aircraft production and contributing greater than Boeing Losses of $6 billion within the last three months.

Boeing says so Machinists will earn a median of $119,309 per 12 months with this latest contractof $75,608 per 12 months.

I’m a professor who has done this Researched organized labor for 20 years. Since the Boeing machinists won much of their original demands, I see many similarities between this deal and the contracts that ended or prevented strikes at UPS and Detroit's big three automakers in 2023.

But it's not clear whether these sorts of union victories will proceed in President-elect Donald Trump's second administration. Based on his record and his rhetoricExpect Trump to make it harder for staff to affix unions and take other steps to weaken the facility of organized unions.

2 big differences

I also see two big differences between these previous contracts and what staff agreed to this time. First, the Boeing strike was more controversial.

By rejecting two previous collective bargaining agreements, staff expressed their anger and impatience not only with Boeing executives but in addition with their very own union. In September, the IAM presented one to its members Proposal described by the union as “the best contract we have negotiated in our history”. But 95% of union members disagreedrejected the agreement and 96% subsequently voted to authorize a strike.

It is rare for union members to overwhelmingly reject their leadership in this manner. And yet it happened again a month later. In late October, staff rejected one other proposal that IAM and Boeing representatives had agreed to, albeit by a smaller majority.

A key sticking point within the previous rounds of negotiations illustrates the second distinguishing feature of the machinists' strike. In 2013, the corporate asked staff to put off staff defined profit pensions.

Because the corporate threatened to maneuver production of a then-new aircraft out of the Seattle area if staff didn’t ratify the change, the rank and file reluctantly agreed to the proposal. You approved this contract by a tight margin in January 2014.

A battle cry

Restoring the lost pension plan became one Battle cry on this industrial dispute.

For weeks it seemed as if the machinists would reject any contract that didn’t provide for an outlined profit pension plan. These plans guarantee staff a certain quantity of cash during their retirement years. Companies are liable for ensuring that they’ve sufficient funds to cover costs.

These plans were commonplace within the mid-Twentieth century. Defined profit plans are extremely rare today. They have largely been replaced by defined contribution planslike 401ks.

Defined contribution plans shift the danger transferred to the worker upon leaving the employer's balance sheet. Employers are only required to contribute a certain quantity to their employees' retirement accounts each pay period. These plans are likely to be inexpensive to manage and fewer dangerous for employers.

This helps explain why The proportion of Americans enrolled there has skyrocketedwhile the proportion of staff with defined profit pension plans has declined sharply.

Long-term trends

In other recent labor disputes, unions demanded a restructuring of the corporate's pension plans, but dropped the demand as negotiations progressed. The demand for a conventional pension serves kind of as a basis for negotiations.

But with the Boeing dispute, demand emerged way more serious. In the tip, the corporate didn’t budge on the difficulty, even though it agreed to extend its contributions to employees' individual retirement accounts.

Had Boeing restored its defined profit plan, it might have stood alone in comparison with other large employers facing labor disputes — bucking a decades-long trend of corporate cost-cutting strategies. The refusal to achieve this probably helps explain the numerous minority of staff who voted against the ultimate proposal.

Although the strike was controversial and the corporate was unwilling to conform to the entire staff' major demands, the strike at Boeing – one in every of the most important – was the strike most costly labor disputes within the US in 1 / 4 century – shall be remembered as one other victory for organized labor these years of resurgence of labor.

But these contract wins at Boeing, UPS, General Motors and the opposite two major automakers in Detroit and beyond show the boundaries of organized labor's power today.

These staff belong to unions that were formed many years ago, and so they have received higher wages and a lot better advantages through collective bargaining over latest contracts. However, increasing the variety of U.S. staff represented by unions stays difficult.

The share of U.S. staff who belong to a union continues to say no and can fall to 10% of the labor force in 2023.

As Joe Biden, probably most of all Worker-friendly president since Franklin Delano Rooseveltleaves the White House and Donald Trump's team prepares to re-enter, I imagine the prospects for union membership growth within the near future appear extremely bleak.

Third vote

Union pushed for approval

On Saturday October 26, Queensland Premier Steven Miles' Labor Party will seek a fourth consecutive term in government, taking over David Crisafulli's Liberal National Party (LNP).

Although Labor won the previous election in 2020 comfortableOpinion polls leading as much as this election have consistently shown this pointed to an LNP victory.

Queensland's recent history shows that voters can result in dramatic election results, corresponding to the autumn of Labor in 2012 and its equally dramatic return to government in 2015. As there isn’t a upper house to envision government power , the winner will likely have relatively free rein to implement their political agenda.

A seamless trend of increased early voting means many Queenslanders have already made their verdict. But what were the large issues that dominated the election campaign and what priorities will the following government work towards?

The usual suspects

The major problems with concern Known to voters in Queensland are probably known to people in other states:

However, the 2 major parties have different priorities and approaches.

A campaign on crime and crises

The LNP is concentrated on attacking Labour's record. Crisafulli has largely tried to maintain the party informed by pointing to what they called “crises” in housing, juvenile crime, the price of living, health and government integrity the least the last 12 months.

The extent of juvenile crime, its causes and possible solutions include: Object the talk.

But the LNP has been keen to portray itself as proposing tougher solutions than its opponents. They have promised to vary juvenile justice laws to discourage offenders, under the slogan “Adult crime, maturity“.

They have also promised to offer “tough love” to at-risk youth through mandatory retraining Warehouse.

On other issues, they promise more efficient health services, incentives for home ownership and more Government transparency.

However, they’ve been careful to avoid more controversial topics and present a “small goal” for economic management. Interestingly, the LNP has largely confirmed that it is going to adopt lots of Labour's budget priorities Relief from the price of living.

Still, last-minute emphasis on a possible repeal of laws decriminalizing abortion and voluntary euthanasia threatened to derail their efforts careful messaging.

The LNP is returning to old ways of doing things and supporting a “indefinite” commitment to coal-fired power plants and the disposal of a controversial proposed dam.

Crisafulli has withdrawn his previous support for the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Treaty.

If they win government, the LNP would likely shut down the fresh candidates too Investigation to seek out truth and healingThey claim they’ll as a substitute give attention to “practical” help for indigenous communities.

They also promise electoral law reform with the long-standing commitment, “corrupt” compulsory preferential voting and the repeal of laws that prohibited property Developer donations.

Progressive balancing act

Steven Miles took over from Annastacia Palaszczuk as Labor leader and prime minister lower than a 12 months ago.

Labor has also focused on using its time in office to handle essential issues while positioning itself as a force for progressive change.

They have warned of the LNP's potential “hidden” dangers and highlighted unpopular public service cuts within the last LNP governed.

They have provided direct relief for the price of living householdswith 50-cent public transit fares, $1,000 energy rebates for households and promised free lunches for the general public Pupils.

They expressly emphasized that this was a dividend from the increased royalties for coal mining Pursue.

When it involves housing, they’ve continued to give attention to solving the issue Undersupply of social and inexpensive housing alongside modest reforms Rights of tenants (Although price caps are excluded).

They promise a brand new era of presidency intervention to enhance competition Gasoline and energy retail.

On crime, Labor has followed the LNP's lead on some issues, corresponding to investing in additional police resources. They have also controversially ignored and emphasized the Human Rights Act, which requires the detention of young people Distraction as a substitute of punishment.

What's much more comforting to progressive voters is the undeniable fact that they’re strongly committed to maintaining their abortion and voluntary euthanasia laws intact. Labor will even proceed the transition renewable energy.

Dissatisfaction with the foremost parties

Despite their efforts, or perhaps due to Crisafulli's disciplined messaging, it doesn’t appear that voters have been persuaded to retain the federal government. There is a transparent mood for change.

However, it must be noted that this is just not exactly an unambiguous endorsement of Crisafulli or the LNP's entire agenda, as opinion polls show that it is just not particularly popular.

After lagging behind for a lot of the campaign, Miles continues to be behind but has caught up plenty of ground within the last week.

Whoever wins could have to manipulate at a time when increasingly individuals are becoming disillusioned mainstream parties.

Among those vying to keep up or increase their position Transverse seats In regional Queensland are the socially conservative Katter's Australian Party in addition to some popular local mayors running as independents.

Meanwhile, the Greens are pushing for a claim more Brisbane seats.

The smaller parties are working intensively to handle the continued problems Housing, Cost of livinghealth and crime. These are all difficult to resolve quickly and don't necessarily help hasty answers.

The next parliament must discover a option to represent a state whose public opinion is split between those in the town and people in the town regional areas across all essential topics.

Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris and Republican candidate Donald Trump are in a close race for the White HouseEvery voting bloc will count – including union members and other people of their household.

The majority of union leaders have, over generations, supported democratic candidatesand this election campaign is not any exception. Although union members have historically supported the Democratic Party by a large margin, this support has fluctuated for at the very least 45 years. In 2016 Polls after the election showed that voters from union households supported the Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton over Trump by only 8 percentage points; in 2012, when Barack Obama was on the ballot, the figure was 18 percentage points.

No Democratic presidential candidate has performed worse with union voters since Ronald Reagan's victories over Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale in 1980 and 1984.

Union voters are particularly distinguished in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Nevadathree swing states wherein the proportion of union voters is above the national average of 10%.

End of 2023 New York Times/Siena College poll in six swing states that Joe Biden won in 2020 – those three plus Arizona, Georgia and Wisconsin – shows that Biden and Trump were tied at 47% amongst union voters when asked who they’d vote for in 2024. Biden had a 8 percentage points ahead among the many same voters in 2020said one other survey.

3 core topics

Union voters, like all Americans, are concerned about many issues. But they’re more likely than most individuals to significantly consider a candidate's record on support for staff and unions. Union historians generally agree that the Biden administration has the second strongest pro-labor record after Franklin D. Roosevelt.

And I feel Historian Nelson Lichtenstein, who claims that Trump’s years in office were bad for the unions and are representative of the assessment of his track record up to now by union experts.

From my perspective as a labor studies scholar, there are three facets of the candidates' track records which can be almost certainly to sway union members come what may.

Federal employees

Trump has signed three Executive Orders in 2018 which restricted the labor rights of about 950,000 unionized federal employees. In 2020, he signed one other measure, often known as Annex Fwhich, in accordance with the Washington Post, goals to “undermine protections for public sector employees.”

Biden these orders repealedHe also arrange a White House task force to make recommendations to streamline the method for organizing unions for federal employees. Harris chaired the duty force. The variety of Federal employees in unions has increased by tens of 1000’s throughout the Biden administration.

Union elections

The rules for holding elections when staff express an interest in forming a union date back to the Thirties, when Roosevelt introduced the National Labour Relations Act into law. The National Industrial Relations Boardcreated by this law oversees union elections.

In 2019, when Trump appointees held a majority of the five seats on the NLRB, the panel overturned an Obama-era NLRB decision mandating a fast election. In 2023, when Biden appointees held a majority, the panel issued a pro-union decision reversing that Trump-era decision.

Today, if a majority of employees in an organization want union representation, the employer must either recognize the union and negotiate with it or seek an election. If the employer violates labor law within the period before the election, the election is canceled and the The NLRB may order the employer to to recognise the union and to barter with it.

OSHA

The Authority for Safety and Health at Workan agency of the Department of Labor, is liable for the health and safety of U.S. staff.

Fewer workplace inspections took place throughout the Trump administration than during Obama's second termThis decline is basically as a consequence of the slow hiring of latest OSHA inspectors. replace those that have retired.

The Number of inspections increases againHowever, in accordance with OSHA calculations, occupational accidents and fatalities increased throughout the Biden administration.

The The Trump administration didn’t issue workplace rules on coronavirus safety, putting a whole bunch of 1000’s of individuals working in healthcare, food retail, meat processing and education in danger.

By comparison, two days after taking office in 2021, Biden issued an executive order establishing mask-mandating guidelines, and his administration Workplace health and safety protocols a high priority throughout the rest of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Compared to the Trump administration’s inaction throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the Biden administration has been more energetic in implementing health and safety measures, proposing rules in July 2024 that may protect around 36 million staff from Health risks from extreme heatAfter a period for written comments, public hearings on the bill can be held.

When Trump tried to chop OSHA funding for 2018 by about $10 million, Congress blocked his efforts. The Biden administration is calls for a 3.7% increase in OSHA’s budget for the financial 12 months 2025.

Legislative and gubernatorial records

Harris was a U.S. senator before becoming vp; her running mate Tim Walz is the governor of Minnesota and previously served in Congress; and Republican vice presidential nominee JD Vance can be currently a U.S. senator. Candidates' performance in these positions are also indicators of what they may attempt to do within the White House.

The AFL-CIO, the biggest umbrella organization of US unions, gave Harris a Lifetime rating of 98% on their voting behavior within the Senate. Rolling received a 93% vote from the AFL-CIO when he was within the House of Representatives. He was one in all the National Education Associationthe biggest union within the country while working as a highschool teacher.

As governor of Minnesota, Walz signed a law paid sick days for civil servants and a measure that made Minnesota the primary state to enact a minimum wage for Uber and Lyft drivers. In 2023, Walz also signed laws establishing the Nursing Home Workforce Standards Board, which might oversee the health and welfare of nursing home employees.

The AFL-CIO has Vance at 0% Assessment for his Senate elections starting in mid-2024. Among other things, Vance opposed the nominations of several judges and government officials with pro-union track records.

Address to the auto staff

Perhaps essentially the most visible sign of Biden's support for unions got here when he formed a picket line with striking members of the United Auto Workers in Michigan in September 2023. He was the primary president to accomplish that.

Trump appeared nearby The next day he gave a speech at a non-union auto parts plant.

More recently, Trump did himself no favors with blue-collar voters and their allies when, in a much-publicized conversation with Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla, SpaceX and X, he praised Musk for shedding employees WHO talked about problems at work and tried to form a union.

It is unclear how unionized households will vote in 2024. But there are There is little question that the campaigns of Harris and Trump are sure that it’s going to be vital similar to in 2020when Biden narrowly won Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania – and in 2016, when Clinton lost these states.

I’m wondering what my father, a butcher and die-hard trade unionist, would think concerning the political situation in our country. Is it “Morning in America“, as Ronald Reagan exclaimed? “American Carnage“, as Donald Trump announced? Or “we have nothing to fear except fear itself”, as Franklin D. Roosevelt put it?

Unions in the car, steel, rubber and other industries played a serious role in FDR's re-election in 1936. According to a poster made during his term: Roosevelt said“If I worked in a factory, the first thing I would do would be to join a union.” Whether he was serious or not, Labour historian I even have long observed that the Democratic Party and unions stuck together at the moment How Peanut butter and jelly.

The unions gave their preferred political party their Votes, time and cash – by volunteering to carry up signs on Election Day, go door-to-door for candidates, and man telephone switchboards to call potential voters. And Democrats pushed for measures supported by unions, similar to the introduction of a minimum wage, the creation of the Social security system and introduction of Federal supervision of union elections.

“That is the job of the unions”

My father, Albert Forrant Jr., benefited from this coalition and took part in it. He planted trees within the Civilian Conservation Corpsa New Deal program for young those who offered jobs and a small wage within the late Nineteen Thirties. After my father returned from World War II, he and my mother bought the family home I grew up in with a Mortgage secured by the federal governmentHe then worked for 40 years as a butcher for a big grocery chain.

Dad often took me to union meetings of the Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen of North America and sometimes talked in the course of the automobile ride concerning the importance of sticking together.

“That’s the job of the unions,” he explained to me. “We help each other.”

Both sides took this marriage as a right until Southern Democrats, fearing that unions would organize black employees throughout the South, joined their pro-business Republican colleagues in Congress and opposed employee-friendly lawsThis led to the Passing of the Taft-Hartley Act in 1947. The law cut union spending on elections, limited the effectiveness of strikes, and tightened organizing rules.

Ultimately, Union membership declinedwhich further soured relations. Fewer unionized households meant less influence, especially in states like Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, which were once the centers of powerful unions. Today, just one in ten U.S. employees is a member of a union.

Confusion in politics

I missed out on practical political instruction in my youth.

Later in life, I worked in a metal factory in western Massachusetts and it was there that I had a light-weight bulb moment. I began as a machinist after which became a sales representative for my union. Many of the 1,000 employees within the factory jogged my memory of my father: They worked hard, focused on supporting their families, were scrupulously fair and lived on their paychecks to make ends meet. Their lives exemplified the quiet dignity that comes with exertions.

If my father were alive today, I don't think he would give you the chance to grasp that in some professions nearly half of the union members supported Republican presidential candidates. within the last elections. Unions are a crucial voting bloc that doesn’t necessarily vote based solely on economic self-interest, nor do they simply vote the way in which union leadership tells them to. In other words, anyone who takes employees' votes as a right has failed.

So why are the political beliefs of many employees so confused?

I take into consideration this query rather a lot, especially as Americans prepare for a crucial election.

Predicting Trump’s victory in 2016

Every week before the 2016 presidential election, I told students in my labor history class that I used to be fairly certain Trump would win that presidential election, and I gave them two reasons.

First, a former student of mine in Michigan was doing preparatory work for Hillary Clinton. She contacted me to Concerns concerning the low level of effort within the Midwest to arrange union households to vote for the Democratic Party's presidential candidate on this key swing state.

Second, every week before the election, I led a discussion in Greenfield, Massachusetts – a metalworking town in a once a robust metal processing regionWith me were three former machinists, and so they were offended and abandoned. Having not had a good job in over 20 years, they were hungry for nearly any type of change and seemed willing to bet on Trump.

I consider this fear is a serious reason why working-class neighborhoods across the Great Lakes and other parts of the country became breeding grounds for Republican victory within the 2016 presidential election. The Republicans’ near-victory in 2020 and Trump's possible second election in 2024.

Fear on the dinner table

As the U.S. economy modified within the late twentieth century, thousands and thousands of producing jobs disappeared. Still, for my part, the Democratic Party did more good for working families than Reagan, George HW Bush and George W. Bush, or Trump.

But the bond between Democrats and the working class was frayed, partly because by the early Nineties most Democratic leaders appeared to have forgotten the party's historic ties to unions.

President Bill Clinton was in office when the downsizing of the commercial heartland met many union members.

The North American Free Trade Agreement, which he promoted and signed at the tip of 1993, caused turmoil within the labor markets. Economists disagree about what number of jobs were lost. Congressional Research Service closed that fewer jobs were created and fewer jobs lost than predicted by supporters and opponents of the measure. The US Bureau of Labor Statistics found that greater than 4 million jobs within the US manufacturing sector were lost total because the entry into force of NAFTA and similar free trade agreements until 2010.

The variety of these jobs is has since recovered barely.

Economists and other scientists disagree concerning the role of automation and other sorts of technologies have played a task in these job losses.

Biden's legacy: union halls activated

Too often, Democrats spoke rhetorically concerning the middle class constructing America. Pipefitters, construction equipment operators, hotel clerks, auto employees, and steelworkers didn’t see themselves in that picture. People like my father and the metal employees I worked with built the country and drove the economy that created the middle-class prosperity for generations that many Americans still enjoy today.

The program of the Democratic Partysomewhat clumsily formulated for my money, now states: “The Democrats know that Wall Street did not build America. America was built by the middle class – and the unions built the middle class.”

Joe Biden is the primary president to take part in a picket line, but for this union historian and lots of others, Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal stays the gold standard for promoting the labor movement.

But it's clear that the Biden administration has fought for laws that give everyone the best to arrange for higher wages, advantages, and dealing conditions, strengthen public sector employees' collective bargaining rights, and guarantee domestic employees, farmworkers, and other unprotected employees the best to arrange. And now the Harris-Walz team will proceed to fight for that agenda.

The Republican Party dedicates its political program for 2024 “To the forgotten men and women of America.” However, this document provides little or no concrete support for employees’ right to arrange.

In a show of strength, Liz Shuler, president of the AFL-CIO – the biggest US trade union federation – and 6 other of the country’s most significant unions influential union leaders spoke on the Democratic Party Convention To its opening night.

For comparison: Only Sean O'Brien, Chairman of the Teamsters Unionspoke on the Republican National Convention, where Trump was nominated for the third time.

One thing seems certain: Unlike in 2016, Democrats in 2024 are aware that they’ll need to make many stops at union halls on their solution to victory.

WASHINGTON – Kyleigh Thurman was bleeding and in pain, but she didn't know her unlucky pregnancy could kill her.

Emergency room doctors at Ascension Seton Williamson Hospital in Texas gave her a pamphlet about miscarriages and advised her to “let nature take its course” before discharging her without treating her ectopic pregnancy.

When the 25-year-old returned three days later, still bleeding, doctors finally agreed to present her an injection to terminate the pregnancy. But it was too late. The fertilized egg growing in Thurman's fallopian tube would rupture it and destroy a part of her reproductive system.

According to a Complaint Thurman and the Center for Reproductive Rights last week, asking the federal government to analyze whether the hospital violated a federal law when staff initially refused to treat her in February 2023.

“I was just left helpless,” Thurman said. “I was just misled.”

Despite the Biden administration's public warning to hospitals to treat pregnant patients only in emergency situations, the facilities proceed to violate federal law. The issue got here under the administration's highlight after reports of improper treatment of ladies in emergency rooms emerged following the Supreme Court's ruling greater than two years ago striking down the constitutional right to abortion.

More than 100 pregnant women in medical distress looking for care in emergency rooms have been turned away or treated negligently since 2022, an Associated Press evaluation of investigations at federal hospitals found.

Two women – one in Florida and one in Texas – suffered miscarriages in public restrooms. In Arkansas, a girl went into septic shock and her fetus died after being sent home within the emergency room. At least 4 other women with ectopic pregnancies had trouble getting treatment, including a California woman who needed a blood transfusion after sitting in an emergency room waiting room for nine hours.

The White House says that despite state bans, hospitals must provide abortions when it’s essential to avoid wasting a girl's health. Texas challenged that policy, and earlier this summer the Supreme Court rejected to repair the issue.

Abortion bans make it difficult to take care of high-risk pregnancies

In Texas, doctors resist 99 years in prison if convicted of performing an illegal abortion. Medical and legal experts say the law makes it harder to make decisions about emergency pregnancy care.

Although terminating an ectopic pregnancy will not be considered an abortion under state law, the draconian penalties deter Texas doctors from treating these patients, argues the Center for Reproductive Rights.

“As much as hospitals and doctors are afraid of violating these state abortion bans, they also have to worry about violating federal law,” said Marc Hearron, a federal government attorney. Hospitals face federal investigation, heavy fines and the specter of having their Medicare funding cut off in the event that they violate federal law.

The organization filed two complaints with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Service last week alleging that various Texas emergency rooms didn’t treat two patients with ectopic pregnancies, including Thurman.

Another Complaint says Kelsie Norris-De La Cruz, 25, lost a fallopian tube and most of an ovary after an Arlington, Texas, hospital sent her home without treatment for her ectopic pregnancy, despite the fact that a physician said discharge was “not in her best interest.”

“Doctors knew I needed an abortion, but these bans make it nearly impossible to get basic emergency care,” she said in a press release. “I am filing this complaint because women like me deserve justice and accountability from those who have hurt us.”

Definitely diagnosing an ectopic pregnancy might be difficult. Doctors can't at all times determine the situation of the pregnancy through an ultrasound, explained three different doctors consulted for this text. Hormone levels, bleeding, a positive pregnancy test and an ultrasound of an empty uterus all indicate an ectopic pregnancy.

“You can't be 100 percent sure — that's the hard part,” said Kate Arnold, a Washington gynecologist. “They're literally time bombs. It's a pregnancy growing inside this thing that can only grow to a certain extent.”

John Seago, director of Texas Right to Life, said state law clearly protects doctors from prosecution in the event that they terminate an ectopic pregnancy, even when the doctor “makes an error” in diagnosis.

“Sending a woman home is totally unnecessary and totally dangerous,” Seago said.

But the state law has made doctors “absolutely” afraid to treat pregnant patients, says Hannah Gordon, an emergency physician who worked at a Dallas hospital until last yr.

“It will force doctors to create questionable scenarios for their patients, even if it is very dangerous,” Gordon said. She left Texas in hopes of becoming pregnant and was nervous concerning the care she would receive there.

Gordon recalled a pregnant patient in her emergency room in Dallas who had signs of an ectopic pregnancy. Because the gynecologists said they couldn't clearly diagnose the issue, they waited to terminate the pregnancy until the patient returned the subsequent day.

“It left a bad taste in my mouth,” Gordon said.

“Oh my God, I'm dying.”

When Thurman returned to Ascension Seton Williamson for a 3rd time, her gynecologist told her she would wish surgery to remove the ruptured fallopian tube. Thurman, who was still bleeding heavily, was reluctant to undergo the procedure. Losing the fallopian tube would put her fertility in danger.

However, her doctor told her that if she waited any longer, she would die.

“She came in and said, either you need a blood transfusion, or you need surgery, or you're going to bleed to death,” Thurman said through tears. “I just thought, 'Oh my God, I'm dying.'”

Ascension Seton Williamson declined to comment on Thurman's case, but said in a press release that the hospital is “committed to providing quality care to all who use our services.”

In Florida, a 15-week pregnant woman lost amniotic fluid for an hour within the emergency room at Broward Health Coral Springs, federal documents show. An ultrasound revealed that the patient's fetus was not surrounded by amniotic fluid, a dangerous situation that may result in serious infections.

The woman suffered a miscarriage in a public toilet that very same day after the emergency room doctor declared her condition “improved” and discharged her without consulting the hospital’s gynecologist.

Emergency personnel took her to a different hospital, where she was placed on a ventilator and discharged after six days.

Abortions after 15 weeks were illegal in Florida on the time. The medical director of obstetrics at Broward Health Coral Springs told an investigator that induction of labor in women with premature rupture of the membranes “has been the standard of care for some time, regardless of the heartbeat, because of the risk to the mother.”

The hospital declined to comment or share its policies with AP.

In one other case in Florida, a physician admitted that state law made emergency pregnancy care harder.

“Because of the new laws … staff can only intervene when the patient's health is in danger,” a physician at Memorial Regional Hospital in Hollywood, Florida, told an investigator looking into the hospital's refusal to supply an abortion to a pregnant woman whose water ruptured at 15 weeks, long before the fetus could survive.

Problems transcend states with abortion bans

In each states with and without abortion bans, serious violations occurred that endangered the health of the mother or her fetus, in line with the AP investigation.

In interviews with investigators, two hospitals in Idaho and Washington which are experiencing staff shortages admitted that they often sent pregnant patients to other hospitals.

A pregnant patient in an emergency room in Bakersfield, California, was examined quickly, but staff failed to acknowledge that she was affected by a uterine rupture. The delay, an investigator concluded, can have contributed to the infant's death.

According to the documents, doctors in emergency rooms in California, Nebraska, Arkansas and South Carolina failed to examine for a fetal heartbeat or discharged patients in mid-labor and left them to present birth at home or in an ambulance.

The shortage of nurses and doctors that hospitals have suffered because the Covid-19 outbreak, the issues in staffing ultrasound stations across the clock and latest abortion laws are making the emergency room a dangerous place for pregnant women, warned Dara Kass, an emergency physician and former official with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

“It is increasingly unsafe to be pregnant and seek medical help in an emergency room,” she said.

Originally published: August 12, 2024 at 9:45 am

A national newspollconducted from June 24 to twenty-eight amongst a sample of 1,260 people, showed Labor leading the Coalition 51 percent to 49 percent, a gain of 1 percentage point because the last Newspoll poll three weeks ago. In the first election, 36 percent voted for the Coalition (down three), 32 percent for Labor (down one), 13 percent for the Greens (up two), 7 percent for One Nation (unchanged) and 12 percent for all others (up two).

Newspoll uses preference flows for 2022 to calculate its two-party estimate. Using the rounded primaries would normally give Labor a 52-48% lead, so the rounding on this poll probably favoured the Coalition.

With Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, 53% were dissatisfied (up three) and 42% satisfied (down one), giving him a net approval rating of -11, a drop of 4 points. This is Albanese's lowest net approval rating since -13 in November 2023 after the Voice referendum. The graph below comprises Newspoll data on Albanese's net approval rating (plus sign) for this term, with an adjusted smoothed line.

However, opposition leader Peter Dutton's net approval rankings fell six percentage points to -16, the bottom since October 2023. Albanese was unchanged at 46-38%, ahead of Dutton as the higher prime minister.

45 to 42 percent of voters rejected the “Coalition’s plans to build nuclear reactors at seven existing and former coal-fired power stations in Australia by 2050.”

The controversy over the nuclear plans has likely given Labor a lift inside the two parties, even when ongoing cost-of-living pressures are denting Albanese's popularity.

Solve survey on nuclear power

A national Cancel survey A nine-newspaper poll of 1,003 people conducted after the announcement of Dutton's nuclear plans (20-23 June) found that 41-37% of voters supported nuclear power. In a more open-ended query, 32% (4 fewer than in February) said they supported nuclear power, 28% opposed it (five more) and 30% (three more) had no strong opinion but were open to an investigation.

Renewable energies generally had a net sympathy of +66, nuclear power of +8 and coal power of +2.

When given the selection between “Labour's plan to switch to 100 per cent renewable energy over the next one to two decades (supported by gas over the next one to two decades)” and “the Coalition's plan to use nuclear power and some gas to support renewable energy”, voters voted for Labour's plan by a majority of 43 per cent to 33 per cent.

Important poll: Labour leads for the primary time since April

A National Essential SurveyThe poll of 1,181 people, conducted between 12 and 16 June, gave Labour a lead of 48-46%, including undecided voters, after a 48-48% tie in early June.

This is Labour's first lead in an Essential poll since April, partly on account of weak preference flows amongst respondents in favour of Labour.

The primary votes on this poll were 32% for the Coalition (down 4), 31% for Labor (down one), 13% for the Greens (unchanged), 8% for One Nation (up three), 1% for UAP (down two), 9% for all others (up one) and 6% for undecideds (up two).

On Australia's Emissions targets52% said we should always persist with our 2030 goal, while 48% said we should always abandon it since it was unattainable and damaging to the economy. 36-31% of voters rejected Dutton's decision to oppose Australia's 2030 goal.

Regarding Israel's military motion within the Gaza Strip, 38 percent (six percentage points greater than in April) said Israel should withdraw permanently, 21 percent (two percentage points more) said a brief ceasefire needs to be agreed to, and 15 percent (4 percentage points less) said Israel's military motion was justified.

Fifty-two percent were satisfied with the Australian government's response to the Israel-Gaza war, 32 percent said it supported Israel an excessive amount of and 16 percent said it was too harsh on Israel.

56-22% of voters supported regulating e-cigarettes so that they’re only available on prescription in pharmacies (in comparison with 58-20% in March). Negative attitudes toward e-cigarettes have increased since March.

Morgan poll: 51-49% for Labour

A national Morgan surveyThe June 10-16 poll, which sampled 1,724 people, found Labour and the Coalition tied 50-50, a gain of three.5 percentage points because the June 2-9 poll, which was a pro-Labour outlier.

In the Morgan Survey The poll was conducted from June 17 to 23 with a sample of 1,696. Labour was ahead by 51 percent to 49 percent.

The primary vote was 37% for the Coalition (down one since 10-16 June), 31.5% for Labor (up two), 13% for the Greens (down 0.5), 6% for One Nation (up one), 8.5% for Independents (unchanged) and 4% for Others (down 1.5).

Further questions on Resolve

I previously reported for nine newspapers on the nationwide Resolve poll, which gave Dutton the lead as preferred prime minister for the primary time within the history of a polling organisation.

In further questions41% (down 4 since August 2023 and ten since October 2021) said climate change is a major problem and we should always take motion now, even when it comes at a big cost.

Thirty-two percent of respondents (up three percentage points since August 2023 and five since October 2021) believed that climate change is gradual, so we will address it in small steps over time. 18 percent (up two and up six) said: “Until we are sure that climate change is a real problem, we should only consider measures that do not entail significant costs.”

Fifty-two percent of respondents supported the goal of a 43 percent emissions reduction by 2030 or called for a more ambitious goal, while 30 percent called for a discount within the goal or rejected it outright.

Voters were asked what Forms of protest They considered it legitimate. The types of protest with the best support were rallies in a park or in front of a parliament (53%) and demonstrations on the road (41%). Other types of protest that involved disturbing the general public or a member of parliament received lower than 15% support.

---

---

NSW Resolve poll: Labor stays ahead on preferences

A brand new South Wales Resolve status survey The poll for the Sydney Morning Herald, based on the May and June nationwide Resolve polls with a sample of 1,000 people, showed 35% for the Coalition (down one vote since April), 32% for Labor (down one vote), 11% for the Greens (down one vote), 15% for independents (down one vote) and seven% for other voters (down two votes) in the first election.

Resolve didn’t provide a two-sided estimate, but The survey parasite estimated that Labor may have a 52-48% lead based on the preference distribution on the 2023 state election. This is barely higher for Labor than a recent poll in NSW Redbridge, which predicted they might only have a 50.5-49.5% lead.

Incumbent Labor politician Chris Minns was voted the popular prime minister, 38% to 13% ahead of Liberal Democrat Mark Speakman (in comparison with 37% to 16% in April).

Voters were also told that the Labour government had recently announced plans to Promoting denser developmentreminiscent of housing blocks, are to be built near 37 railway stations and that the Liberals opposed this policy. 50-31% of voters supported this policy.

A by-election in NSW took place on 22 June in Northern Plateauswith Labor not contesting. The Nationals won 68.0% of the first vote (a decline of 4.2% because the 2023 state election), the Shooters 11.4% (up 7.9%), the Greens 9.1% (up 4.5%) and two independents combined 11.6%; Labor had gained 10.2% in 2023.

The Electoral Commission has chosen the Nationals and the Greens as the ultimate two candidates within the Nationals versus Shooters battle. The Nationals will win very easily.