Connect with us

U.S.

One-Third Of Insane | Increase In US Homicide Rate Because Of Chicago Neighborhoods

Published

on

(Via The Daily Caller)

The United States saw an increase in homicides by roughly 9 percent in 2016, and more than one-third of that increase came from neighborhoods in Chicago where just one-third of residents live, according to an analysis by The Wall Street Journal.

Chicago and Baltimore have seen violence rise to or near 1990s levels in the past two years, whereas other cities have seen a drop.

In contrast, areas in Los Angeles have experienced a dramatic drop in violence. Areas with 30 percent of the metropolis’ population are responsible for one-quarter of the 13 percent drop in the nation’s murder rate from 2002 to 2014. The nation’s capital has also seen a decrease of murder, which the authors attribute to gentrification and new gang initiation and community policing efforts.

The WSJ’s analysis shows that murders have been taking place in sections of Chicago or Baltimore where poverty has worsened, as well as areas with less of a police presence than in the past.

A George Mason University criminologist’s research, cited by TheWSJ’s authors, showed “that about 1% of city streets produce 25% of a city’s crime, and 5% of the streets produce half the crime.”

Chicago has seen an explosion in violence, with the city seeing 771 murders, an increase of 57 percent from 2015. The city has had more murders than New York and Los Angeles combined.

President Donald Trump has frequently criticized Chicago for its plague of violence, calling the city a “total disaster” in November 2017.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Iowa

“Despite What You All Think”: Nearly $150 Million in New Water Commitments Follow Reynolds’ Defense of Iowa’s Record

Published

on

Gov. Kim Reynolds defended Iowa’s water-quality efforts and the stewardship of farmers during a May 1 press conference. In the weeks that followed, the state and federal governments committed approximately $148.3 million in clearly identifiable new water funding and financing.

During a May 1, 2026, press conference announcing Iowa’s “Farm to Faucet” proposal, Gov. Kim Reynolds pushed back when reporters questioned the condition of Iowa’s water.

“Despite what you all think,” Reynolds told the group of reporters before defending Iowa’s investments and arguing that farmers care about protecting their land because they intend to pass it down to their children.

The governor’s defense came as Iowa continued confronting concerns involving nitrates, lead pipes, PFAS contamination, aging treatment facilities and rural water infrastructure. Reynolds announced what her administration promoted as a nearly $320 million water-quality package spanning 12 years. The proposal was signed into law on June 1 and took effect July 1.

How Much of the $320 Million Is Actually New?

The nearly $320 million headline does not represent $320 million in entirely new state spending.

The Iowa Department of Agriculture’s own announcement states that the legislation works partly by “re-directing existing dollars.” Approximately $76 million can be clearly identified as new or additional state funding:

  • $52 million over 12 years for conservation practices in the Greater Des Moines watershed.
  • $6 million over 12 years for additional water-quality monitoring, based on an additional $500,000 annually.
  • $8 million as a one-time investment in drinking-water and wastewater treatment grants.
  • $10 million to establish the Rural Iowa Infrastructure Bank, which will provide low-interest loans for smaller communities.

That equals approximately $76 million in clearly new state commitments—about 24% of the administration’s advertised $320 million package.

Another $25 million is designated for Central Iowa Water Works to expand nitrate-removal capacity. However, the state says that money will come from the existing balance of an underused program, meaning it is redirected funding rather than an entirely new appropriation. Other portions of the $320 million package similarly involve restructuring existing water-excise-tax revenue and moving money between programs.

More Than $72 Million in Federal Support Followed

Separate from Reynolds’ state package, federal agencies announced approximately $72.3 million in water-related funding and financing for Iowa after her May 1 comments.

The documented federal commitments include:

  • $46.116 million announced by the Environmental Protection Agency on May 20 for identifying and replacing lead service lines.
  • $9.457 million announced by the EPA on May 19 for PFAS testing, planning and treatment projects in small or disadvantaged Iowa communities.
  • $344,000 announced on June 26 for small and rural drinking-water systems.
  • $16.373 million announced by the U.S. Department of Agriculture for rural Iowa water infrastructure, including new wells, a treatment plant, a water tower and pipelines. Of that amount, approximately $15.5 million consists of loans and $874,000 consists of grants.

The federal money addresses several different problems, including lead exposure, PFAS, insufficient rural water supplies and aging infrastructure. It should not be presented as though every dollar directly addresses agricultural nitrate runoff.

The Combined Total

Since Reynolds’ May 1 remarks, the clearly identifiable commitments are:

  • New state funding: approximately $76 million
  • Federal funding and financing: approximately $72.3 million
  • Combined total: approximately $148.3 million

These numbers represent appropriations, allotments, grants, loan funds and financing commitments. They do not mean that all $148.3 million has already been spent or that the projects have been completed.

The state portion is also spread across as many as 12 years, while several federal awards will flow through state or local programs before construction begins.

Still, the scale and timing of the investments matter. Reynolds told reporters, “Despite what you all think,” while defending Iowa’s water record. Yet within weeks, her administration signed a major water package and federal agencies committed tens of millions more to Iowa’s lead pipes, PFAS contamination, nitrate-treatment capacity and struggling rural water systems.

Investment is welcome, but the funding itself demonstrates that Iowa faces real and costly water challenges. The final measure of success will not be the size of a press-release headline. It will be whether nitrate levels decline, unsafe pipes are removed, rural systems become reliable and Iowa residents can trust the water flowing from their faucets.

Continue Reading

U.S.

Safe Elections By Any Means Necessary

Published

on

Continue Reading

U.S.

Populist Wire is Back

Published

on

Populist Wire Website is Back!

Continue Reading

Trending

Donate to Populist Wire

*Note: Every donation is greatly appreciated, regardless of the amount.