What should L.A. do about homelessness? Renters and homeowners answer differently, poll finds

In their win against Minnesota, the Lakers made only five of 30 attempts from three. So how did they win?

The No. 8 Warhawks, undefeated so far this fall, built their bonds through years of youth football and rugby.

Come back along memory lane as we break broken down the top 10 moments of the 2024 season that led to the Liberty’s breakthrough first WNBA title:

The Vikings head west to face the Rams on Thursday night in an NFC battle that should provide plenty of intrigue. 

Every fall, Universal Studios Orlando becomes a nighttime scare factory. We sent a self-professed wimp to brave it and review it.

In addition to mental health concerns, some experts worry that apps that track kids’ learning leave schools and families vulnerable to hackers. | Julie Bennett/Washington Post via Getty Images This story originally appeared in Kids Today, Vox’s newsletter about kids, for everyone. Sign up here for future editions. I’ve been reporting on kids’ mental health for more than a year now, and one concern keeps coming up in my interviews with parents and experts: school apps. Blackboard, Schoology, ClassDojo, the list goes on — these apps help teachers communicate with families, and parents and other caregivers keep track of their kids’ learning. Good, right?  Kind of. The tools started to appear in the early 2010s but really took off in the early months of the Covid-19 pandemic, when millions of schoolchildren were forced to adapt to learning from home, said Leah Plunkett, author of Sharenthood: Why We Should Think Before We Talk About Our Kids Online and a faculty member at Harvard Law School.  Some, like Blackboard or Google Classroom, function as “open grade books,” where parents and kids can see each assignment grade as a teacher enters it. Others, like ClassDojo, allow families to keep track of kids’ behavior at school. Still others can be used to send messages or manage extracurriculars like band or sports. The apps are now ubiquitous — open grade book tools are in use in a majority of public and private high schools in America, Gail Cornwall reports at The Cut. These tools are an improvement over the system many millennials remember, in which students and parents might not find out about their grades until the school quarter or semester was almost over.  By that time, “Sometimes it’s too late to bring those grades up,” said Meg St-Esprit, a Pittsburgh-based journalist and content creator whose almost-13-year-old son’s middle school uses Google Classroom and PowerSchool. Now kids and parents can track their progress — and their difficulties — together. But the apps have raised privacy concerns, with some experts fearing that sensitive data about children could fall into the hands of cybercriminals or be used to limit kids’ opportunities later on.  Others fear that by encouraging parents to monitor every fluctuation in their children’s grades, the tools are fueling an achievement-obsessed culture that can lead to stress and burnout among kids. “It can feel like you’re always plugged in,” St-Esprit said. “It can feel a little bit like hustle culture.” School apps are helpful — and stressful If you don’t have a school-aged child at home, you might be surprised at the sheer number of apps that contemporary education entails.  St-Esprit, who has four children including her middle-schooler, has used not just Google Classroom and PowerSchool but also Seesaw, Remind, Bloomz, ClassDojo, PowerSchool, PaySchools Central, CutTime, and TeamSnap. The notifications alone can be a time suck for parents: I received at least one during each call I made for this story. Still, for many families, the apps are a more efficient mode of communication than, say, a flier wadded up in a kid’s backpack. Parents often appreciate the transparency of open grade book apps, as well as the ability to message a teacher quickly rather than setting up a conference during the workday (some teachers appreciate the flexibility, too). “It is fundamentally good and constructive for school systems to have real-time, reliable ways to communicate with parents and guardians,” Plunkett said. Phone apps aren’t a reliable mode of communication for everyone. Some families don’t have smartphones. Some don’t have the spare time necessary to navigate a veritable forest of login and setup instructions, some of which can be confusing even for relatively tech-savvy parents (not that I speak in any way from experience).  With open grade book tools and other school communication tech, “There’s just such clear ways that privileged parties benefit and others do not,” Catharyn Shelton, an assistant professor of educational technology at Northern Arizona University, told EdWeek.  App developers are aware of these concerns and some have taken steps to address equity issues. ClassDojo and Seesaw, for example, allow teachers to translate messages into a student’s home language. Beyond accessibility, the apps come with other problems. Seeing every assignment grade show up on a phone or computer screen and knowing your parents will see it, too, can be anxiety-producing for kids. St-Esprit’s son recently got a low grade on an assignment and “he was anxious about it while we waited for that grade to pop up,” St-Esprit said.  “Google Classroom is a source of stress for me,” her son, Eli, told me in an email. “It’s hard to navigate.” The apps can also encourage an obsessive focus on grades at the expense of learning. “She’s constantly like, ‘Did they grade that test? Did they grade that essay?’” one parent of a 12-year-old told The Cut.  Emily Weinstein, lead author of a recent report on teen stress and burnout, said that the apps and the atmosphere of “constant quantification” they can create can contribute to high levels of academic pressure felt by young people today. Other experts have argued that the ability to track kids through apps has led to a hypervigilance among parents that leads them to limit children’s autonomy — which in turn can harm kids’ mental health and hold them back from developing crucial social and cognitive skills.  “We’ve got this idea right now that the closer we keep our kids, the more information we have, the more we direct, the more that we control, the better off our kids will be,” Lynn Lyons, a therapist who specializes in anxiety disorders, told me last year. “And the research is showing the opposite.” The apps also raise privacy concerns In addition to mental health concerns, some experts worry that the apps leave schools and families vulnerable to hackers. Some apps are used to communicate pickup plans, which can include a child’s geographical location, Plunkett said. “If that app has a breach, then all of a sudden, whoever’s getting that information has access to where every child in that school or school district is going.” Meanwhile, records of students’ behavioral challenges at school could come back to harm them later in life, Plunkett said. And the use of AI by schools and districts is raising the stakes on all conversations about student data. A school could use behavioral information to deny a student a letter of recommendation, Plunkett said, but “what I’m even more concerned about are those instances where there may not necessarily be a human review,” where data could be aggregated and analyzed by computer to make predictions or draw conclusions about students. Schools have long kept data on student grades and test scores. But the apps in use today raise the possibility of collecting and storing a larger, more granular array of information that could be used in ways students and families might not understand unless proper guardrails are put in place. Updated federal youth privacy legislation would be a start, Plunkett said. App developers also need to provide schools with “nutrition label-style information” about what data their apps collect and how it can be used, she said. Schools, meanwhile, can curb app overload by communicating really important information — a sick child, a serious behavior problem — by email, phone, or face-to-face meeting, St-Esprit said.  The goal should be for parents to get “enough information to know what’s going on,” but not so much that “there is this constant state of looking over the child’s shoulder,” Plunkett said. “There was something to be said for the brick-and-mortar days” of the ’80s and ’90s, she added. “We went to school and our parents didn’t necessarily know everything we did there every day, and I think that was probably good for everybody.” What I’m Reading A growing number of states are considering legislation to protect the privacy or compensation of child influencers. More states are also using opioid settlement money to help “grandfamilies” — grandparents raising kids whose parents struggle with substance abuse. Young people today apparently prefer gummy Halloween candy to chocolate options, which is an incorrect opinion. My older kid and I just finished the Eerie Elementary series, about an evil elementary school that eats children (a premise that really resonates with kids who have mixed feelings about school). Now we need a new book series to start — I am taking recommendations.  From My Inbox “The experience of high school (and even middle school!) students has become far more rigorous and demanding,” a 17-year-old reader wrote to me in response to last week’s newsletter about teen stress and burnout. “To pursue my field of interest I’ve needed to go through an extreme amount of work only to apply to a reputable institution and find a flood of essays waiting for me — Caltech alone has nine. Over these last four years, I’ve done research competitions, nonprofit work, math competitions, astronomy competitions, and quiz bowls just to make my application competitive. I still have anxiety about the future because I’m unsure if anything I’m doing will matter.” This is a tough thing to hear from a young person, but also confirms  what the researchers found in their report. It’s a reminder of the need to examine the economic and cultural pressures that make kids feel they have to achieve so much so young. Lastly, I’d love to hear from families and teachers about apps — do you, your students, and/or the kids in your life use them to keep track of grades and extracurriculars? Do you love them, hate them, or both? Get in touch at anna.north@vox.com.

Due to the multiple drugs found in Payne's system at the time of his death, cops believe employees likely procured them for the singer before his death.

House intelligence committee chair Rep. Mike Turner said in a statement that the U.S. must think about targeting North Korean troops if they invade Ukraine.

And he’s four Yankees wins away from that becoming a reality.

Former President Donald Trump is gaining support from younger Black and Latino voters, although Vice President Kamala Harris still leads among these groups overall, a new poll finds.

The WNBA's Seattle Storm on Wednesday endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz for president. The endorsement drew backlash.

Animal welfare activists have pushed airlines to off vegan creamer options, arguing that benefits cows and passengers.

Has any man in history talked about “how much he hates rats” more than New York City Mayor Eric Adams? Adams himself posed that question at the city’s inaugural National Urban Rat Summit last month. “Let’s figure out how we unify against public enemy number one: Mickey and his crew.”Mickey is, canonically, a mouse. But Adams’s campaign against the city’s endemic brown-rat population might be the most effective and highest-profile initiative of his scandal-ridden mayoralty. This summer, new municipal rules spurred restaurateurs to pull down thousands of pandemic-era dining sheds, taking away thousands of cozy homes for rodents. The city has ramped up its mitigation and extermination efforts in parks and public housing, and created a “rat czar” interagency position. Most important, New York is “containerizing” its trash—joining just about every other wealthy, dense metropolis on Earth in deciding to put its garbage in bins, instead of plastic bags rats can chomp through in one bite.[Xochitl Gonzalez: Mayor Adams, we need a rat czar]I could not quite believe the situation when I moved to New York last year. Residents of Barcelona put their trash down pneumatic tubes. Berliners sort theirs into common dumpsters or bins. People across the United States put their trash in trash cans. In New York, businesses and households pile plastic bags directly on the sidewalk. The bags sit overnight, oozing and stinking and quivering with rodent activity before being collected the next morning. As a result, litter litters the streets, and rats dine at an “all-you-can-eat buffet,” as Adams put it.The city’s appalling garbage-collection methods are a central reason it has so many rats: 3 million of them, according to one estimate. Containerization should reduce the rat population, ecologists told me. “Cities that have excellent containerization have fewer rats,” Jason Munshi-South of Drexel University, who studies human-animal interactions, told me.Last year, the city required food-related businesses, including restaurants, bodegas, and grocery stores, to use tight-lidded containers for their garbage. In March, all businesses were compelled to do the same. Three weeks from now, homes and residential buildings with fewer than ten units will have to join in; next year, larger apartment buildings will too. By mid-November, 70 percent of the city’s garbage will be containerized, according to the Department of Sanitation, up from 5 percent two years ago.Adams is already claiming victory: “We’re seeing a decrease in rat sightings,” he crowed. My question was how the war was going from the rats’ perspective.New Yorkers hate rats with cause. The rodents have bitten babies, pets, the elderly, and blue-collar workers. They destroy property, including critical electrical systems and family keepsakes. They are vectors for disease, including leptospirosis, which sickened five city sanitation workers last year. They make messes, dispersing greasy chicken bones and greasy droppings. They are also—how to put this—super creepy. At the rat summit, the mayor mentioned how “traumatizing” it is for New Yorkers to kick up their toilet seat in the morning and see a sodden, brown rat emerge the wrong way up the pipe, as happens from time to time. “You’ll never feel comfortable again in that bathroom.”Decades of prior battles, deploying different strategies and different weaponry, have resulted in a gory stalemate. The city puts out tens of thousands of pounds of rodenticide a year, and exterminates the rats in countless basements and burrows. When Adams was Brooklyn borough president, he championed an “amazing rat-trap device”: a solution-filled drowning bucket. Such lethal methods might work for a single building. But rats are too fertile for extermination campaigns to work at scale. You could kill 99 percent of the rats in the city, and the survivors would repopulate it in months.The city is experimenting with giving the rats birth-control medication, though the technique has not been proved to work outside the laboratory. Proper containerization does work, though, by limiting the sum of calories available to the rats. I assumed that Mickey—or, I suppose, Remy—and his friends were starving and fleeing in search of food.Not exactly. Rats do not migrate; most never move farther than a few hundred feet from where they were born. They are live-fast, die-young types. They reach sexual maturity at three or four months, have scores of babies, and perish within a few years. If you take away a colony’s garbage pile, experts told me, its does and dams will start having fewer litters with fewer pups. The rat population will decline not because more rats are dying but because fewer are being born.[Read: New York’s rats have already won]Famine will affect New York’s rats in other ways too. Rats are generally chatty, communitarian animals that enjoy sharing food, snuggling, and mutual grooming. Munshi-South described watching rats dine together at a dumpster. “Nobody bothers one another,” he said. “They just eat peacefully.”Yet rat communities are also territorial and hierarchical. Subordinate rats, usually young males, will “feel the effects of the burrow having less food first,” the biologist Matthew Combs told me. These lesser rats will go hungry. They will be forced to search for new food sources, and to forage during the day when the dominant rats are sleeping. The dominant rats will exile them.Michael Parsons, an urban ecologist, told me that food stress will foment more erratic rat behavior and more rat-on-rat violence. More young male rats will end up on the streets, on other rats’ blocks, in other rats’ territory, with more “nips on the tail, wounds on the body.” Rats secrete a waxy, ruddy substance called porphyrin; distressed rats secrete more of it and are less stringent about grooming. The rodents will look like they are crying red tears.Earlier this fall, I took the subway up to Hamilton Heights, a jewel box of a neighborhood in Harlem and the site of the city’s most comprehensive containerization pilot. Last year, the Department of Sanitation installed small plastic dumpsters and increased trash pickup to six days a week. Some neighborhood residents groused about the loss of parking spaces. Still, when I visited, the blocks were remarkably clean. Only a few trash bags were piled on the sidewalks, wafting their scent into ground-floor windows.I also met up with Chi Ossé, the city-council member representing Bedford-Stuyvesant and northern Crown Heights. We took a stroll through the part of his district that has been designated as a rat-mitigation zone by the Adams administration, bombarding it with inspections and exterminations. “I got everywhere cleaned up before this walk-through!” Ossé deadpanned. “We’re doing this route! Call in the cats!”[Read: Rats have not changed. We have.]Rats remained a problem in Bed-Stuy because of “bad-faith landlords” and inconsiderate litterers, Ossé told me. But “I have noticed a difference,” he said, thanks to social change, not just policy change. Blocks where people were actively learning about rodent mitigation and locking away their garbage were seeing progress. He lamented that the area did not yet have the Hamilton Heights–type dumpsters and increased collection. “It’s not rocket science,” he said. “It’s parking or it’s rats.”In Hamilton Heights, rodent sightings are down a remarkable 55 percent since the containerization pilot began, the Department of Sanitation told me. In the rat-mitigation zones, they are down 14 percent. And city-wide, sightings have been down in 12 of the past 13 months. The politicians believe the war on rats is being won.The ecologists I spoke with were not so sure. Some theorized that you would see more rats before you saw fewer if containerization were working, because the animals would spend more time searching for food and would break from their normal nocturnal rhythms. The bigger issue was that the ecologists didn’t see how anyone would know one way or another. “No one is collecting the data,” Munshi-South told me.The city is using 311 complaints about rats as a proxy for rat sightings, and rat sightings as a proxy for the rat population. This is a strategy that has “well-documented” issues, Munshi-South said. People might call 311 when they see a rat in a place where they’re disturbed to see a rat, or where a rat seems like a problem for the city to deal with. But many people don’t call 311, ever. People who are used to seeing rats might be less likely to call 311 when they see one. Moreover, it is not clear that rising or falling 311 complaints correspond to an increase or decrease in problematic human-rat interactions, or an increase or decrease in the rat population.To be fair to the city, quantifying rats is a challenge for scientists too. Ecologists’ preferred strategy for estimating animal populations is something called mark-recapture. Researchers trap a sample of moose, for instance; paint, tag, chip, or collar them; and release them. The scientists wait, trap another round of moose, and extrapolate the species’ population size from the fraction of animals that were captured twice.The technique works for animals as varied as grizzlies and ticks (which get dotted with nail polish). It is extraordinarily difficult with rats. The animals are “cryptic,” Parsons explained. They live underground, hiding, making them near-impossible to observe. There are lots of them, meaning that you have to capture many to have a chance at recapturing one. Even the marking and releasing part is hard.Parsons knows because he’s one of the few people who has done it with rodent New Yorkers. He and his colleagues set traps at a waste-management facility and baited rats with “beer and anchovies.”“Why beer and anchovies?”“If you want to bait a rat, you give it something it’s already used to—in Brooklyn, pizza; in Chinatown, dim sum.”The scientists anesthetized the captured rats. “You wait until it calms down and hopefully falls asleep,” he told me. “At that point, some brave soul is going to use Kevlar gloves, lift the animal out, do the measurements, implant a microchip, look for body lice and anything else they might be harboring.” They let the rodents wake up and recover before releasing them. “If you wait too long and they’re still groggy, the other rats will kill them. If you don’t wait long enough, they’re feisty and angry.”He clarified: “I have been attacked.”Given how hard it is to study urban rats, we know remarkably little about them; we know more about moose in the Yukon than we do about my murid neighbors in New York. Among the things academics are unsure of: which neighborhoods have the most rats, where city rats are most likely to build their burrows, how big their colonies are, what causes of death are most common, and how the rat population has waxed and waned over the years. The estimate that New York has 3 million rats? Unreliable. It is an extrapolation from a decade-old number derived from that questionable 311 data.Still, there is a way that City Hall could get solid-enough information on how the war on rats is going, Munshi-South told me. It could deploy trained inspectors to survey designated areas repeatedly, looking for burrows and rodent activity. The mayor’s office did not respond to my questions about whether it is doing so. This is the fog of rat war; victory will be what the humans decide it is.The humans who know best how the battle is going are not working in City Hall, I figured, but in the city’s crawl spaces and condemned buildings. I contacted several exterminators. Each said the same thing: Proper containerization should shrink the rodent population, yet they had not seen a change in rat-related calls.There’s a difference between putting trash in bins and taking rats’ food sources away, Kevin Carrillo of M&M Pest Control told me. And he agreed to show me the difference on a walk around his Brooklyn neighborhood. On houses, apartment buildings, businesses, sheds, and tree boxes, Carrillo pointed out tunnels, unctuous smudges, claw marks, and bite marks; on trash cans and recycling bins, he showed me holes the rats had created. I felt like Dorothy, except instead of seeing the world in color having landed in Oz, I was seeing the omnipresence of rat activity having landed in Bushwick.New York City is a perfect home for the “shy” creatures, Carrillo told me. Calories are plentiful, and the housing stock is ideal. Rats burrow under sidewalks and into building foundations, creating labyrinths with multiple exit-and-entry points. The animals chew through wood, plastic, mortar, drywall, concrete, and even aluminum sheeting. “They only need a spot the size of a quarter to get in.”[Read: New York City has genetically distinct ‘uptown’ and ‘downtown’ rats]We stopped at the building where Carrillo lives. “I had noticed that the rats were going under the siding,” he told me. His landlord had screwed construction mesh into the side of the building and cemented in the gaps to keep the animals out. Carrillo pointed at a tiny hole. “They’re figuring out how to get into it,” he said. “You see the discoloration from the rats rubbing there.” As he was pointing at the spot, a rat capered along the inside of the metal mesh. “He’s going right into the next building,” Carrillo sighed.On top of being skilled, rats are smart, Carrillo stressed. “You think you’ve solved a problem and blocked them out of a space, but they just need a day or two to figure out the next way in,” he said. “That trope of rats working their way through a maze—they are problem solvers.”Rats got into his building. They got into every trash can on his street. They’re going to get into the new trash cans that New York is making everyone use too, Carrillo prophesied. Indeed, Mayor Adams is touting the city’s official wheelie bins as “rat-proof” and making residents buy 3.4 million of them, all from one contractor. But the bins are not rat-proof. They are made of hard plastic. Rats can and do and will gnaw their way through them, particularly if motivated by hunger. (When I asked about the “rat-proof” claim, a Department of Sanitation spokesperson referred to the bins as “rat-resistant.”) “Maintenance and replacement is going to be important,” Combs told me. But who’s going to replace an expensive wheelie bin as soon as it has a quarter-size hole in it?Already, many of the city’s containers pose no obstacle to rats. New York is dotted with mesh trash cans with open tops, which Combs referred to as “rat ladders.” And plenty of rubbish never makes it to a container, whether takeout boxes dumped on the street or grocery bags deposited next to overflowing municipal cans. Containerization would be worth it to reclaim the sidewalk space and keep the city smelling fresher, I thought, and will work insofar as it takes the rats’ calories away. But with sanitary practices like these, in a city like this, there will always be rats, even if nobody knows how many, even if the mayor hangs a Mission Accomplished banner based on 311 calls.Having learned that the rats I saw on my block were truly my neighbors, I wanted to be, well, neighborly. One recent morning, I took a thermos of iced coffee and a pair of binoculars and idled by a dumpster near my apartment. A few minutes later, a mischief of rats climbed up and chowed down.

Clippers play first regular-season game in their new home, but fall in overtime to the Phoenix Suns.

Of course, the two need no introduction after playing against each other plenty of times throughout their careers, with Rizzo even having struck out Freeman during a 2021 game between the Cubs and Braves.

At the Eau Palm Beach Resort & Spa, still waters run chic.

Former President Trump is in a dead heat with Vice President Harris in the key swing states of Arizona, North Carolina and Georgia, according to Marist polling.

McDonald's USA President Joe Erlinger on Wednesday said the fast-food chain needs to rebuild trust with the public after it pulled the item off its menu at a fifth of its 14,000 US restaurants.

Get all the stories you need-to-know from the most powerful name in news delivered first thing every morning to your inbox.

A national security memorandum detailed how agencies should streamline operations with artificial intelligence safely.

In a powerful address to the U.N. former hostage Amit Soussana recounted her 55 days in Gaza and urged the international community to act to save the 101 hostages being held by Hamas terrorists in Gaza.

Michel Houellebecq rails against most ideologies, but his latest novel exposes his love of conversion narratives.

On the campaign trail for Kamala Harris with Martin Sheen

The Post’s art critics pick their favorite museums affiliated with colleges and universities across the U.S.

Dodgers broadcaster Charley Steiner has battled multiple myeloma blood cancer this season, but tells Bill Plaschke he's grateful it is in remission.

The rising interest in business etiquette reflects the difficulties many workers still face as they return to the office, from how to dress to how to connect.

The Post’s art critics pick their favorite 10 smaller museums dotted across the country.

When Jack Flaherty takes the mound Friday, it will be the first time in 58 years a pitcher who grew up in L.A. starts a World Series game for the Dodgers.

USC defensive coordinator D'Anton Lynn's lineup has been hit hard by injuries, forcing him to try unusual schemes to boost the team's tepid pass rush.

The Los Angeles Times editorial board member Mariel Garza announced her resignation Wednesday after the paper declined to endorse a presidential candidate.

The Post’s art critics rank the best art museums in the United States, based on the breadth and depth of their art collections and exhibitions.

Breanna Stewart, who has won everywhere, led the Liberty to its first title, a signature triumph that can stand above all the rest. 

Readers with federal government contracting experience weigh in on a federal supervisor’s struggle to deal with a difficult contractor.

During one of the wildest presidential election campaigns in memory, the two candidates appear effectively tied in the battleground states.

Despite efforts at home and abroad to undermine faith in U.S. elections, the 2024 vote is set to be the most secure and reliable ever.

"The cost of not being able to set boundaries with kids has never been higher," Dr. Becky Kennedy.

Nearly 7 million Americans 65 and older are living with Alzheimer’s disease, which gradually destroys memory and thinking skills and the ability to perform daily tasks.

Liam Payne's Argentina hotel room has been raided by cops, who are on the hunt for "new intel" about the staffers working on the day of the One Direction singer's death.

The “Chrisley Knows Best” alum, 55, was booted from his job at the chapel.

The EPA has finalized stricter rules meant to limit the exposure of children to lead paint.

I am a person of nostalgic lunchmeat experience: One of the deepest gustatory pleasures of my childhood involved stripping a bologna round of its red plastic casing, slicking on a generous smear of mayonnaise, twirling it into a rubbery tube — or a cone, in the occasional case of a pickle cameo — and quickly devouring it. I still feel a flutter of longing when I clock festive pinks and yellows in a refrigerator case; every corned beef sandwich I’ve eaten since has probably been a Freudian attempt to recapture some of that magic.  So when I say lunchmeat is convenient and delicious, it’s from a place close to both my heart and my stomach, and completely without contempt.  But even I have to admit that deli meat has baggage. In large and varied studies, regularly eating processed meats — including cold cuts and hot dogs — leads to higher rates of cancers and cardiovascular disease.  These products are also at high risk for contamination with listeria — outbreaks of which have made headlines recently, including one involving tainted Boar’s Head liverwurst that has sickened 57 people and killed nine since July, and has prompted a wave of lawsuits. Listeria is a nasty little bug that can cause vomiting, diarrhea, and meningitis, and can be deadly in particularly vulnerable people.  Experts say there’s no amount of lunchmeat that’s healthy to eat. Still, out of convenience, pleasure, or pure sentimentality, it often remains on the menu. If you’re one of the many people with a special place in your gut for deli sandwiches, there are still ways to minimize their harm.  What that pastrami sandwich is doing to your body Cold cuts are different from other kinds of meat in one important way: They’re processed in ways that delay spoilage. That processing involves a range of different methods, including drying (as in beef jerky), fermenting (as in many salamis and pepperonis), smoking (as in country ham), and curing with salt or other additives (as in many hot dogs and a wide range of lunchmeat). Processing meat adds more to it than just shelf life. Curing, often using nitrates and nitrites — preservatives that prevent spoilage and preserve meat’s pinkish color — and salt, is one of the more common ways food manufacturers extend the life of modern cold cuts. When they reach the gut, nitrates and nitrites can be converted into a variety of molecules, among them ones that can be harmful to your health. These compounds occur naturally in some foods, including leafy vegetables, but combining them with animal protein — especially with protein containing high levels of heme iron, like beef and pork — raises the chance they’ll transform into those bad actors. Smoking meat also changes its chemical composition. Cooking animal protein at a high temperature and burning its dripping juices and fat create amazing flavors — but also, a whole other set of gnarly compounds. Transforming the chemical structure of meat in these ways has health consequences for people who eat a lot of it. In 2015, the World Health Organization released a report concluding that eating just 50 grams of processed meat daily — about the equivalent of a hot dog — increased a person’s lifetime colorectal cancer risk by 18 percent. Other studies suggest processed meat consumption also increases breast, prostate, esophageal, and pancreatic cancer risk.   Eating processed meat can also raise the risk of cardiovascular disease, including heart attacks and strokes, in part due to their high salt content — which raises blood pressure — and their high levels of saturated fats. In one large European study, a daily hot dog led to a 30 percent increase in cardiovascular disease rates.  It’s not just the deli meat in a deli sandwich that can affect your health, says Julia Zumpano,  a registered dietitian at the Cleveland Clinic Center for Human Nutrition. The supporting players — including bread, condiments, cheese, and other goodies — are also part of the nutritional picture, so they also bear some consideration, for better or for worse.  Why lunch meat is particularly prone to contamination Deli meat’s long and winding path from production facility to table also creates multiple opportunities for microbial contamination. Chunks of meat often get processed and mushed together into a slab in one place, sliced in another, then moved “from the conveyor belt to the packaging center, to the cooler, to the semi, to the distributing center, to another semi, to the grocery store, and then it sits there until someone buys it,” says Zumpano.  The recent liverwurst outbreak involved listeria, a bacteria that’s particularly dangerous to newborns and people who are pregnant, immunocompromised, or aged 65 and above. However, lunchmeat has also been associated with salmonella and Campylobacter infections. The contamination sometimes happens in filthy production plants — as in the latest Boar’s Head outbreak — but can also happen when tainted meat spreads bacteria to other products through contact with knives or meat slicers at a deli counter. A harm-reduction approach to sandwiches Zumpano says — very sadly for my fellow bologna lovers — that the healthiest lunchmeat is no lunchmeat at all. Still, you may consider what the alternative is when packing your lunch. If you’re replacing a hoagie with fast food or something from a vending machine, she says, “Maybe that deli meat sandwich could have been a little bit healthier — depending on the deli meat.” (It’s worth noting that even Zumpano says she eats deli meat from time to time.) If you’re simply not ready to break up with cold cuts, you can still do a lot to minimize your sandwiches’ health risks. Buying cold cuts at a deli counter is a great first step. This is where you can find the preservative-free meats that won’t last long on supermarket shelves. If you have access to meat freshly cut at the time of sale, “You can probably get a turkey breast that is just sliced turkey” — nitrate- and nitrite-free, unsmoked, and without tons of added salt, says Maya Feller, a registered dietitian nutritionist based in Brooklyn. (The fatty, preservative-filled stuff is also likely to be available at deli counters, so you still need to approach your decisions here critically.)  Zumpano says — very sadly for my fellow bologna lovers — that the healthiest lunchmeat is no lunchmeat at all There’s a small convenience sacrifice in making this choice: Because preservative-free meats have shorter shelf lives, you might need to buy less of it more often. “When I buy fresh meat off the bone, I buy a half pound versus a pound,” says Zumpano.   If you’re nowhere near a deli counter or you’re not ready to give up packaged cold cuts, you still have a range of choices. Don’t bother looking at the front of the package — that’s all marketing, says Zumpano — and instead, flip it over to look at the more detailed information on the back. Feller starts by looking at the ingredient list. The meat you’re expecting to eat should be the first ingredient on the list, not water or other ingredients that serve as fillers or binders, she says. She also advises looking at how much of the daily recommended allowance of sugar, saturated fat, and salt is in one serving of the product; these should all come close to or be below 5 percent. The back of the package should also tell you if nitrates or nitrites are in the product. Here, don’t assume that natural is necessarily better: Some manufacturers add celery or beetroot powder to their products to take advantage of their naturally high levels of nitrates, but there’s no evidence that meat cured with these products is less harmful. Natural or not, these chemicals can cause the same damage as synthetic nitrates, says Cristian Jimenez Martinez, a biochemist at Mexico’s National Polytechnic Institute who authored a recent review on natural preservatives. “The dose makes the poison,” she wrote in an email to Vox. The same goes for higher-end artisanal products, which are not necessarily better for us, either. There’s an odd egalitarianism in knowing small-batch charcuterie and mass-produced baloney can both achieve the same level of carcinogenicity, which makes it especially important for consumers to understand what they’re eating. Although public health authorities generally recommend that pregnant and immune-compromised people in particular avoid cold cuts to avoid the risk of listeria infections, people can also safely consume these products by heating them first. Some health experts recommend zapping them in the microwave under a damp paper towel until steaming; Zumpano pan-fried lunchmeat when she was pregnant.  If you’re up for a radical change, you can give your sandwiches a full makeover. One option is to thin-slice leftover meats or other proteins you’ve cooked at home. (Zumpano often suggests her clients cook double the amount of protein they plan to eat at dinnertime, then put the rest on a sandwich or atop a salad the next day.) For a convenient shelf-stable option that’s rich in protein but is less processed than lunchmeat, low-sodium canned chicken and fish are good bets. Life is full of opportunities to trade a little risk for a little pleasure, and sandwiches offer a daily opportunity to make that trade You can also make your ham sandwich healthier by making changes to the vehicle holding the lunchmeat. Replacing heavily processed bread with bread that contains water, flour, yeast, salt, and maybe some added grains or seeds can increase the nutritional value of a sandwich. So can switching out mayo for hummus or avocado spread, which typically contain healthier fats and some soluble fiber. It’s always good to ramp up vegetable content too by adding more tomatoes, bell peppers, cucumbers, and other garden favorites.   Life is full of opportunities to trade a little risk for a little pleasure, and sandwiches offer a daily opportunity to make that trade. For long-term health, the key is to choose the lower-risk option more often and save the higher-risk option for moments of celebration.

Former pro wrestling superstar Mick Foley talked about former President Donald Trump in a video on social media and made clear he supports the Harris-Walz ticket.

The then 36-year-old Gacy asked his victim if he'd ever done "poppers," alkyl nitrite, as he took out a brown bottle, splashing liquid onto a rag and shoving it into the teen's face.

Although Mitchell's cause of death was ruled as drowning, police say the autopsy report suggested that she "had fought for her life."

Experts say that the former president’s campaign promise of cheap gasoline could have severe economic consequences.

Officials at New Zealand's Dunedin International Airport are "surprised how much global interest" a time-limit on curbside farewell embraces has garnered.

This story was originally published by Grist and is republished here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration. Helene and Milton, the two massive hurricanes that just swept into the country — killing hundreds of people, and leaving both devastation and rumblings of political upheaval in seven states — amounted to their own October surprise. Not that the storms led to some irredeemable gaffe or unveiled some salacious scandal. The surprise, really, may be that not even the hurricanes have pushed concerns about climate change more toward the center of the presidential campaign. As early voting gets underway in some states and with less than two weeks before Election Day, voters will decide between Vice President Kamala Harris, who has called climate change an “existential threat,” and former President Donald Trump, who has called climate change a “hoax.” The editorial staff of Grist, one of Vox’s partners in the Climate Desk collaboration, has put together a climate-focused voter’s guide — a package of analyses and predictions about what the next four years may bring from the White House, depending on who wins. The next administration will be decisive for the country’s progress on critical climate goals. By 2030, the US has committed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 50 percent to 52 percent below 2005 levels, and expects to supply up to 13 million electric vehicles annually. A little further down the line, though no less critical, the country’s climate goals include reaching 100 percent carbon-free electricity by 2035 and achieving a net-zero emissions economy by 2050. As you gear up to vote, here are 15 ways that Harris’s and Trump’s climate- and environment-related policies could affect your life — along with some information to help inform your vote. —Paige Vega, Vox climate editor, and Grist staff Your energy mix Over the last year or so, utility companies across the country have woken up to a new reality: After two decades of flat growth, electricity demand is about to spike, due to the combined pressures of new data centers, cryptocurrency mining, a manufacturing boom, and the electrification of buildings and transportation. While the next president will not directly decide how the states supply power to their new and varied customers, he or she will oversee the massive system of incentives, subsidies, and loans by which the federal government influences how much utilities meet electricity demand by burning fossil fuels — the crucial question for the climate. Trump’s answer to that question can perhaps be summed up by the three-word catchphrase he’s deployed on the campaign trail: “Drill, baby, drill.” He is an avowed friend of the fossil fuel industry, from whom he reportedly sought $1 billion in campaign funds at a fundraising dinner, promising in exchange to gut environmental regulations. Harris is not exactly running on a platform of decarbonization, either. In an effort to win swing votes in the shale-boom heartland of Pennsylvania, she has reversed course on her past opposition to fracking, and she has proudly touted the record levels of oil and gas production seen under the current administration. Despite the risk of nuclear waste, the Biden administration has also championed nuclear power as a carbon-free solution and sought to incentivize the construction of new reactors through subsidies and loans. Although Harris says her administration would not be a continuation of Biden’s, it’s reasonable to expect continuity with Biden’s overall approach of leaning more heavily on incentives for low-emissions energy than restrictions on fossil fuels to further a climate agenda. —Gautama Mehta, Grist environmental justice reporting fellow Your home improvements In 2022, the Biden administration handed the American people a great big carrot to incentivize them to decarbonize: the Inflation Reduction Act, or IRA. It provides thousands of dollars in the form of rebates and tax credits for a consumer to get an EV and electrify their home with solar panels, a heat pump, and an induction stove. (Though the funding available for renters is slim, it is out there.) In 2023, 3.4 million Americans got $8.4 billion in tax credits for home energy improvements thanks to the IRA. If elected, Trump has pledged to rescind the remaining funding, which would require Congress’s support. By contrast, Harris has praised the law (which, as vice president, she famously cast the tie-breaking vote to pass) and would almost certainly veto any attempts by Congress to repeal it. As a presidential candidate, she has not said whether she would expand the law, though many expect she would focus on more efficient implementation. But while repealing the IRA might slow the steady pace of American households decarbonizing, it can’t stop what’s already in motion. “There are fundamental forces here at work,” said Gernot Wagner, a climate economist at Columbia Business School. “At the end of the day, there’s very little that Trump can do to stand in the way.” For one, the feds provide guidance to states on how to distribute the money made available through the IRA. More climate-ambitious states are already layering on their own monetary incentives to decarbonize. So even if that IRA money disappeared, states could pick up the slack. And two, even before the IRA passed, market forces were setting clean energy on a path to replace fossil fuels. The price of solar power dropped by about 90 percent between 2010 and 2020. And like any technology, electric appliances will only get cheaper and better. It might take longer without further support from the federal government, but the American home of tomorrow is, inevitably, fully electric — no matter the next administration. —Matt Simon, Grist senior staff writer focusing on climate solutions Your home insurance premiums Whether they know it or not, many Americans are already confronting the costs of a warming world in their monthly bills: In recent years, home insurance premiums have risen across the country, as insurance companies face the fallout of larger and more damaging hurricanes, wildfires, and hailstorms. In some states, like Florida and California, many prominent companies have fled the market altogether. While some Democrats have proposed legislation that would create a federal backstop for these failing insurance markets — with the goal of ensuring that coverage remains available for most homeowners — these proposals have yet to make much headway in a divided Congress. For the moment, it’s state governments, rather than the president or any other national politicians, that have real jurisdiction over homeowner’s insurance prices. Near the end of the presidential debate in September, when both candidates were asked about what they’d do to “fight climate change,” Harris began her response by referring to “anyone who lives in a state who has experienced these extreme weather occurrences, who now is either being denied home insurance or is being jacked up” as a way to counter Trump’s denials of climate change. Traditional homeowner policies don’t include flood insurance, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency runs a flood insurance program that serves around 5 million homeowners in the US, mostly along the East Coast. Homeowners in the most flood-prone areas are required to buy this policy, but uptake has been lagging in some particularly vulnerable inland communities — including those that were recently devastated by Hurricane Helene. Project 2025, which many experts believe will serve as the blueprint to a second Trump term (though his campaign disavows any connection to it), imagines FEMA winding down the program altogether, throwing flood coverage to the private market. This would likely make it cheaper to live in risky areas — but it would leave homeowners without financial support after floods, all but ensuring only the rich could rebuild. —Jake Bittle, Grist staff writer focusing on climate impacts and adaptation Your transportation The appetite for infrastructure spending is so bipartisan that the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, signed in 2021, has become more widely known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. But don’t be fooled. A wide gulf separates how Harris and Trump approach transportation, with potentially profound climate implications. Harris hasn’t offered many specifics, but she has committed to advancing the rollout out of the Biden administration’s infrastructure agenda. That includes traditional efforts like building roads and bridges, mixed with Democratic priorities including union labor and an eye toward climate-resilience. The infrastructure law and the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act include billions in spending to promote the adoption of electric vehicles, produce them domestically, and add at least 500,000 charging stations by 2030. They also include greener transportation efforts aimed at, among other things, electrifying buses, enhancing passenger rail, and expanding mass transit. That said, Harris has not called for the eventual elimination of internal combustion vehicles despite such plans in 12 states. Trump has also been sparse on details about transportation — his website doesn’t address the issue except to decry Chinese ownership. During his first term and 2020 campaign, he championed (though never produced) a $1 trillion infrastructure plan. It focused on building “gleaming” roads, highways, and bridges, and reducing the environmental review and government oversight of such projects. He has favored flipping the federal-first funding model to shift much of the cost onto states, municipalities, and the private sector. Ultimately, Trump seems to have little interest in a transition to low-carbon transportation — the official 2024 Republican platform calls for rolling back EV mandates — and he remains a vocal supporter of fossil fuel production. —Tik Root, Grist senior staff writer focusing on the clean energy transition Your health Rising global temperatures and worsening extreme weather are changing the distribution and prevalence of tick- and mosquito-borne diseases, fungal pathogens, and water-borne bacteria across the US. State and local health departments rely heavily on data and recommendations on these climate-fueled illnesses from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), an agency whose director is appointed by the president and can be influenced by the White House. In his first term, Trump tried to divorce many federal agencies’ research functions from their rulemaking capacities, and there are concerns that, if he wins again in November, Trump would continue that effort. Project 2025, a sweeping blueprint developed by right-wing conservative groups with the aim of influencing a second Trump term, proposes separating the CDC’s disease surveillance efforts from its policy recommendation work, meaning the agency would be able to track the effects of climate change on human health, like the spreading of infectious diseases, but it wouldn’t be able to tell states how to manage them or inform the public about how to stay safe from them. Harris is expected to leave the CDC intact, but she hasn’t given many signals on how she’d approach climate and health initiatives. Her campaign website says she aims to protect public health, but provides no further clarification or policy position on that subject, or specifically climate change’s influence on it. Over the past four years, the Biden administration has made strides in protecting Americans from extreme heat, the leading cause of weather-related deaths in the US. It proposed new heat protections for indoor and outdoor workers, and it made more than $1 billion in grant funding available to nonprofits, tribes, cities, and states for cooling initiatives such as planting trees in urban areas, which reduce the risk of heat illness. It’s reasonable to expect that a future Harris administration would continue Biden’s work in this area. Harris cast the tie-breaking vote on the IRA, which includes emissions-cutting policies that will lead to less global warming in the long term, benefiting human health not just in the US but worldwide. But there’s more to be done. Biden established the Office of Climate Change and Health Equity in the first year of his term, but it still hasn’t been funded by Congress. Harris has not said whether she will push for more funding for that office. —Zoya Teirstein, Grist staff writer covering politics and the intersection between climate change and health Your food prices Inflation has cooled significantly since 2022, but high prices — especially high food prices — remain a concern for many Americans. Both candidates have promised to tackle the issue; Harris went so far as to propose a federal price-gouging ban to lower the cost of groceries. Such a ban could help smaller producers and suppliers, but economists fear it could also lead to further supply shortages and reduced product quality. Meanwhile, Trump has said he will tax imported goods to lower food prices, though analysts have pointed out that the tax would likely do the opposite. Trump-era tariff fights during the US-China trade war led to farmers losing billions of dollars in exports, which the federal government had to make up for with subsidies. Trump’s immigration agenda could also affect food prices. If reelected, Trump has said he would expel millions of undocumented immigrants, many of whom work for low pay on farms and in other parts of the food sector, playing a vital role in food harvesting and processing. Their mass deportation and the resulting labor shortage could drive up prices at the grocery store. Meanwhile, Harris promises to uphold and strengthen the H-2A visa system, the national program that enables agricultural producers to hire foreign-born workers for seasonal work. In the short term, it must be emphasized that neither candidate’s economic plans will have much of an effect on the ways extreme weather and climate disasters are already driving up the cost of groceries. Severe droughts are one of the factors that have destabilized the global crop market in recent years, translating to higher US grocery store prices. Warming has led to reduced agricultural productivity and diminished crop yields, while major disasters throttle the supply chain. Even a forecast of extreme weather can send food prices higher. These climate trends are likely to continue over the next four years, no matter who becomes president. But the winner of the 2024 election can determine how badly climate change batters the food supply in the long run — primarily by controlling greenhouse gas emissions. —Frida Garza, Grist staff writer focusing on the impact of climate change on food and agriculture, and Ayurella Horn-Muller, Grist staff writer focusing on the impact of climate change on food and agriculture. Your drinking water “I want absolutely immaculate, clean water,” Trump said in June during the first presidential debate this election season. But if a second Trump presidency is anything like the first, there is good reason to worry about the protection of public drinking water. During his first term in office, the Trump administration repealed the clean water rule, a critical part of the Clean Water Act that limited the amount of pollutants companies could discharge near streams, wetlands, and other sources of water used for public consumption. “It was ready to protect the drinking water of 117 million Americans and then, within a few months of being in office, Donald Trump and [former EPA administrator] Scott Pruitt threw it into the trash bin to appease their polluter allies,” former Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune said in a 2017 press release. While in office, Trump also secured a conservative majority on the Supreme Court, which last year tipped the court in favor of a decision to vastly limit the Environmental Protection Agency’s power to regulate pollution in certain wetlands, forcing the agency to weaken its own clean water rules. A Harris administration would likely carry forward the work of several Biden EPA measures to safeguard the public’s drinking water from toxic heavy metals and other contaminants. For example, in April, the EPA passed the nation’s first national drinking water standard to protect an estimated 100 million people from a category of synthetic chemicals known as PFAS, or “forever chemicals,” which have been linked to cancer, high blood pressure, and immune system deficiencies. Enforcing the new standard will require the agency to examine test results from thousands of water systems across the country and follow up to ensure their compliance — an effort that will take place during the next White House administration. “As president,” Harris’ website says, “she will unite Americans to tackle the climate crisis as she builds on this historic work, advances environmental justice, protects public lands and public health, increases resilience to climate disasters, lowers household energy costs, creates millions of new jobs, and continues to hold polluters accountable to secure clean air and water for all.” Project 2025 indicates that a future Trump administration would eliminate safeguards like the PFAS rule that place limits on industrial emissions and discharges. Just this month, the EPA issued a groundbreaking rule requiring water utilities to replace virtually every lead pipe in the country within 10 years. With funds from Biden’s bipartisan infrastructure law, the agency will also invest $2.6 billion for drinking water upgrades and lead pipe replacements. Harris has previously spoken out about the dangers of lead pipes, stating at a press conference in 2022 that lead exposure is “an issue that we as a nation should commit to ending.” The success of these and other measures will rely on a well-staffed EPA enforcement division, which may end up being one of the most insidious stakes of this election for environmental policies. Budget cuts and staff departures during the first Trump administration gutted the EPA’s enforcement capacity — a problem that the agency has spent the past four years trying to mend. Project 2025 “would essentially eviscerate the EPA,” said Stan Meiburg, who served as the EPA’s acting deputy administrator from 2014 to 2017. —Lylla Younes, Grist senior staff writer covering chemical pollution, regulation, and frontline communities Your clean air Biden’s clean air policy has been characterized by a spate of new rules to curb toxic air pollution from a variety of facilities, including petroleum coke ovens, synthetic manufacturing facilities, and steel mills. While environmental advocates have decried some of these regulations as insufficiently protective, certain provisions — such as mandatory air monitoring — were hailed as milestones in the history of the agency’s air pollution policy. Former EPA staffer and air pollution expert Scott Throwe told Grist that a Harris- and Democratic-led EPA would continue to build on the work of the past four years by enforcing these new rules, which will require federal oversight of state environmental agencies’ inspection protocols and monitoring data. Project 2025 proposes a major reorganization of the EPA, which would include the reduction of full-time staff positions and the elimination of departments deemed “superfluous.” It also promotes the rollback of a range of air quality regulations, from ambient air standards for toxic pollutants to greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fired power plants. What’s more, a growing body of research has found that poor air quality is often concentrated in communities of color, which are disproportionately close to fossil fuel infrastructure. Conservative state governments have pushed back against the Biden EPA’s efforts to address “environmental justice” through agency channels and in court — efforts that will likely enjoy more executive support under a second Trump administration. —Lylla Younes, Grist senior staff writer covering chemical pollution, regulation, and frontline communities Your public lands Under the Antiquities Act of 1906, a national monument can be created by presidential decree. The act can be a useful tool to protect important landscapes from industries like oil, gas, and even green energy enterprises. Tribal nations have asked numerous presidents to use this executive power to protect tribal homelands that might fall within federal jurisdiction. During his first term, Trump argued that the act also gives the president the implicit power to dissolve a national monument. In 2017, Trump drastically shrunk two Obama-era designations, Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante in Utah, in what amounted to the biggest slash of federal land protections in the history of the United States. At the time, Trump said “bureaucrats in Washington” should not control what happens to land in Utah. While giving back local control was Trump’s stated rationale, tribes in the area, like the Diné, Ute, Hopi, and Zuni, had been working for years to protect the two iconic and culturally significant sites. Meanwhile, his decision opened up the land for oil and gas development. While not all tribal nations are opposed to oil and gas production, tribal environmental advocates are worried that a second Trump term will erode federal environmental regulations and commitments to progress in the fight against climate change. Since 2021, the Biden administration has put more than 42 million acres of land into conservation by creating and expanding national monuments. This includes the Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni, a new monument spanning a million acres near the Grand Canyon — the kind of protection that tribal activists for years had worked to prevent industrial uranium mining. And just this month, the administration announced the creation of the Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary — a 4,500-square-mile national marine sanctuary to be “managed with tribal, Indigenous community involvement.” But Harris might not continue that legacy. While she has remained silent about what she would do to protect lands, she has been vocal about continuing the US’s oil and gas production as well as a push for more mining to help with the green transition — like copper from Oak Flat in Arizona and lithium from Thacker Pass in Nevada — both important places to tribal communities in the area. Tribes have been subjected to the adverse effects of the energy crisis before — namely dams that destroyed swaths of homelands and nuclear energy that increased cancer rates of Southwest tribal members — and without specific protections, it’s easy to see green energy as a changing of the guard instead of a game changer. —Taylar Dawn Stagner, Grist Indigenous affairs reporting fellow Your next climate disaster Congress controls how much money FEMA receives for relief efforts after catastrophic events like hurricanes Helene and Milton, but the president holds significant sway over who receives money and when. A second Trump administration would likely curtail some of the climate-focused resiliency projects FEMA has pursued in recent years, such as cutting back money for infrastructure that would be more resilient against hazards like sea level rises, fires, and earthquakes. Republican firebrands, like US Rep. Scott Perry from Pennsylvania, have decried these projects as wasteful and unnecessary. Under the Stafford Act, which governs federal disaster response, the president has the power to disburse relief to specific parts of the country after any “major disaster” — hurricanes, big floods, fires. In September, Trump suggested he might make disaster aid contingent on political support if he returns to office, promising to withhold wildfire support from California unless state officials give more irrigation water to Central Valley farmers. Harris has not given an explicit indication of how she would fund climate-resiliency or disaster-response programs, though she has boosted FEMA’s recovery efforts following Helene and Milton. —Jake Bittle, Grist staff writer focusing on climate impacts and adaptation Your understanding of climate change The United States has long been a leader in research essential to understanding — and responding to — a warming world. The government plays a key role in advancing climate science and providing timely meteorological data to the public. Neither Trump nor Harris address this in their platform, but history yields clues to what their presidency might mean for this vital work. Trump has consistently dismissed climate change as a “hoax” and downplayed scientific consensus that it is anthropogenic, or driven by human activities. As president, he gutted funding for research, appointed climate skeptics and industry insiders, and eliminated scientific advisory committees from several federal agencies. Thousands of government scientists quit in response. (In fact, still reeling from Trump’s attacks, new union contracts protect scientific integrity to combat such meddling.) His administration censored scientific data on government websites and tried to undermine the findings of the National Climate Assessment, the government’s scientific report on the risks and impacts of climate change. If reelected, Trump would almost certainly adopt a similar strategy, deprioritizing climate science and potentially even restructuring or eliminating federal agencies that advance it. Harris has long supported climate action: As senator, she co-sponsored the Green New Deal, and, as vice president, cast the deciding vote to pass the Inflation Reduction Act, which bolstered funding for agencies that oversee climate research. As part of its “whole of government” approach to the crisis, the Biden administration created the National Climate Task Force, with the EPA, NASA, and others to ensure science informs policy. Although Harris hasn’t said much about climate change as a candidate, climate organizations generally support her campaign and believe her administration will build on the progress made so far. —Sachi Kitajima Mulkey, Grist climate news reporting fellow Your electric bill A lot goes into calculating the energy rates you see on your monthly electric bill — construction and maintenance of power plants, fuel costs, and much more. It’s pretty tough to draw a direct line from the president to your bill, so if you’re worried about your energy costs, you’d do well to read up on your local public utility commission, municipal electric authority, or electric membership cooperative board. What the president can do, though, is appoint people to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the board of up to five individuals who regulate the transmission of utilities across the entire country. As the US continues to shift away from fossil fuels, a fundamental problem stands in the way: The country’s aging and fragmented grid lacks the capacity to move all of the electricity being generated from renewable sources. In May, FERC, which currently has a Democratic majority, approved a rule to try to solve that issue — it voted to require that regional utilities identify opportunities for upgrading the capacities of existing transmission infrastructure and that regional grid operators forecast their transmission needs 20 years into the future. These steps will be essential for utility companies to take advantage of the subsidies offered in the IRA and bipartisan infrastructure law. But the rule is facing legal challenges, which like much else in US courts, appear to be political. So even if Harris wins the presidency, and maintains a commission that prioritizes the transition away from fossil fuels, the oil and gas industry and the politicians who support it will not acquiesce easily. If Trump wins, he’d have the chance to appoint a new FERC chair from among the current commissioners and to appoint a new commissioner in 2026, when the current chair’s term ends. (Or possibly sooner.) Although FERC’s actions tend to be more insulated from changes in the White House because commissioners serve five-year terms, a commission led by new Trump appointees would most likely deprioritize initiatives that would upgrade the grid to support clean energy adoption. Trump’s appointees supported fossil fuel interests on several fronts during his previous term, for instance by counteracting state subsidies to favor coal and gas plants. —Emily Jones, Grist regional reporter, Georgia, and Izzy Ross, Grist regional reporter, Great Lakes Your trash Some 33 billion pounds of plastic waste enter the marine environment globally every year, and the problem is expected to worsen as the fossil fuel and petrochemical industries ramp up plastic production. Perhaps the most important step the next president could take to curb plastic pollution is to push Congress to ratify and implement the United Nations’ global plastics treaty, which is scheduled to be finalized by the end of this year. In August, Biden administration announced its support for a version of the treaty that limits plastic production, and, though Harris hasn’t made any public comment about it, experts expect that her administration would support it as well. Meanwhile, a former Trump White House official told Politico in April that Trump — who famously withdrew the US from the Paris Agreement in his first term — would take a “hard-nosed look” at any outcome of the plastics negotiations and be “skeptical that the agreement reached was the best agreement that could have been reached.” The Biden administration has also taken some positive steps to address plastic pollution domestically, including a ban on the federal procurement of single-use plastics. Experts expect that progress to continue under a Harris administration. In 2011, as California’s attorney general, Harris sued plastic bottle companies over misleading claims that their products were recyclable. As a US senator, she co-sponsored a Democratic bill to phase out unnecessary single-use plastic products. Trump, meanwhile, does not have a strong track record on plastic. Although he signed a law to remove and prevent ocean litter, he has taken personal credit for the construction of new plastic manufacturing facilities and derided the idea of banning single-use plastic straws. And Trump’s “drill, baby, drill” agenda could increase the extraction of fossil fuels used to make plastics. —Joseph Winters, Grist staff writer covering plastics, pollution, and the circular economy Your votes After decades of failed attempts to tackle the climate crisis, Congress finally passed major legislation two years ago with the Inflation Reduction Act. Not a single Republican voted for it. Elections aren’t just important for getting the legislative power needed to enact climate policies — they’re also important for implementing them. The IRA and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, another key climate-related law, are entering crucial phases for their implementation, particularly the doling out of billions of dollars for clean energy, environmental justice, and climate resiliency. Trump, having vowed to rescind unspent IRA funds if elected, seems poised to hamper the law’s rollout, slowing efforts to get the country using more clean energy. But it’s a mistake to imagine that only federal elections matter when it comes to climate change. Eliminating greenhouse gases from energy, buildings, transportation, and food systems requires legislation at every level. In Arizona and Montana, for example, voters this year will elect utility commissioners, the powerful, yet largely ignored officials who play a crucial role in whether — and how quickly — the country moves away from fossil fuels. State legislators can also open the door to efforts to get 100 percent clean electricity, as happened in Michigan and Minnesota after the 2022 election. Even in a state like Washington with Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee, who once campaigned for the White House on a climate change platform, votes matter — climate action is literally on the ballot in November, when voters could choose to kill the state’s landmark price on carbon pollution. Depending on what happens with the presidential and congressional races, state, and local action might be the best hope for furthering climate policy anyway. —Kate Yoder, Grist staff writer examining the intersections of climate, language, history, culture, and accountability Your global outlook During his first term, Trump pulled the US out of the Paris Agreement, a global commitment to reduce the burning of fossil fuels in an effort to curb the worst impacts of climate change. “I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris,” he said from the Rose Garden of the White House in 2017. Trump didn’t entirely abandon global climate discussions — his administration continued to attend global climate conferences, where it endorsed events on fossil fuels. The Biden administration rejoined the Paris Agreement and pledged billions of dollars to combat climate change both domestically and abroad, but a second Trump administration would likely undo this progress. Trump says that he would pull out of the Paris Agreement again, and reportedly would also consider withdrawing the US from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, a 1992 treaty that’s the basis for modern global climate talks. Harris is expected, at least, to continue Biden’s policies. Speaking from COP28 in Dubai last year, an annual United Nations climate gathering, she celebrated America’s progress in tackling the climate crisis and petitioned for much more to be done. “In order to keep our critical 1.5 degree-Celsius goal within reach,” she said, “we must have the ambition to meet this moment, to accelerate our ongoing work, increase our investments, and lead with courage and conviction.” But both the Trump and Biden administrations achieved record oil and gas production during their time in office, and Harris opposes a ban on fracking. In order to make a dent in the climate crisis, whoever becomes president would have to reject that status quo and put serious money behind global promises to mitigate climate change. Otherwise, climate change-related losses will just continue to mount — already, they are expected to cost $580 billion globally by 2030. —Anita Hofschneider, Grist senior staff writer focusing on Indigenous affairs Sign up for the Explain It to Me newsletter The newsletter is part of Vox’s Explain It to Me. Each week, we tackle a question from our audience and deliver a digestible explainer from one of our journalists. Have a question you want us to answer? Ask us here.

Kentucky state Sen. Johnnie Turner was known for his staunch support for the coal industry and other causes in his Appalachian district.