KANSAS CITY—Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas, officials with the Chiefs and the Kansas City Sports Commission issued a joint statement Monday confirming there would be no parade if the Chiefs win the Super Bowl. Last year's parade drew hundreds of thousands of red-clad fans.

“We hope that this journey ends with a victory in Tampa and if that’s the case, we will continue to work with the experts to celebrate safely when the time is appropriate,” Chiefs president Mark Donovan said in a statement.

A county near Kansas City is offering to host a parade even though the team says it doesn’t plan to have one. Cass County commissioners said in a statement that they are “proud members of Chiefs Kingdom” and offered to host the celebration. Not everyone thought this was a good idea.

Email messages left with the Cass County commission on Tuesday were not immediately returned.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2020/2/1580929297396.jpeg" alt="The February 2020 Chiefs Super Bowl Parade" />
 <figcaption>The February 2020 Chiefs Super Bowl Parade</figcaption>
 </figure>KANSAS CITY—Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas, officials with the Chiefs and the Kansas City Sports Commission issued a joint statement Monday confirming there would be no parade if the Chiefs win the Super Bowl. Last year's parade drew hundreds of thousands of red-clad fans.“We hope that this journey ends with a victory in Tampa and if that’s the case, we will continue to work with the experts to celebrate safely when the time is appropriate,” Chiefs president Mark Donovan said in a statement.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">My coworkers and I are tired of putting bodies in bags, but yeah go off Cass County. <a href="https://t.co/3PRpELBFMI">pic.twitter.com/3PRpELBFMI</a>&mdash; Kayti Vernier (@KaytiVernier) <a href="https://twitter.com/KaytiVernier/status/1353439234703683584?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 24, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>A county near Kansas City is offering to host a parade even though the team says it doesn’t plan to have one. Cass County commissioners said in a statement that they are “proud members of Chiefs Kingdom” and offered to host the celebration. Not everyone thought this was a good idea.Email messages left with the Cass County commission on Tuesday were not immediately returned.

COVID-19 prompts debate over Super Bowl parade for Chiefs

WASHINGTON— (AP) President Joe Biden on Tuesday ordered the Department of Justice to end its reliance on private prisons and acknowledge the central role government has played in implementing discriminatory housing policies.

In remarks before signing the order, Biden said the U.S. government needs to change “its whole approach” on the issue of racial equity. He added that the nation is less prosperous and secure because of the scourge of systemic racism.

“We must change now,” the president said. “I know it’s going to take time, but I know we can do it. And I firmly believe the nation is ready to change. But government has to change as well.”

Biden rose to the presidency during a year of intense reckoning on institutional racism in the U.S. The moves announced on Tuesday reflect his efforts to follow through with campaign pledges to combat&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/racial-injustice">racial injustice.</a>

Beyond calling on the Justice Department to curb the use of private prisons and address housing discrimination, the new orders will recommit the federal government to respect tribal sovereignty and disavow discrimination against the Asian American and Pacific Islander community over the coronavirus pandemic.

Biden directed the Department of Housing and Urban Development in a memorandum to take steps to promote equitable housing policy. The memorandum calls for HUD to examine the effects of Trump regulatory actions that may have undermined fair housing policies and laws.

Months before the November election, the Trump administration rolled back an Obama-era rule that required communities that wanted to receive HUD funding to document and report patterns of racial bias.

The order to end the reliance on privately-run prisons directs the attorney general not to renew Justice Department contracts with privately operated criminal detention facilities. The move will effectively revert the Justice Department to the same posture it held at the end of the Obama administration.

“This is a first step to stop corporations from profiting off of incarceration,” Biden said.

The more than 14,000 federal inmates housed at privately-managed facilities represent a fraction of the nearly 152,000 federal inmates currently incarcerated.

The federal Bureau of Prisons had already opted not to renew some private prison contracts in recent months as the number of inmates dwindled and thousands were released to home confinement because of the coronavirus pandemic.

GEO Group, a private company that operates federal prisons, called the Biden order “a solution in search of a problem. ”

“Given the steps the BOP had already announced, today’s Executive Order merely represents a political statement, which could carry serious negative unintended consequences, including the loss of hundreds of jobs and negative economic impact for the communities where our facilities are located, which are already struggling economically due to the COVID pandemic,” a GEO Group spokesperson said in a statement.

David Fathi, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s National Prison Project, noted that the order does not end the federal government’s reliance on privately-run immigration detention centers.

“The order signed today is an important first step toward acknowledging the harm that has been caused and taking actions to repair it, but President Biden has an obligation to do more, especially given his history and promises,” Fathi said.

The memorandum highlighting xenophobia against Asian Americans is in large part a reaction to what White House officials say was offensive and dangerous rhetoric from the Trump administration. Trump, throughout the pandemic, repeatedly used&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/a7c233f0b3bcdb72c06cca6271ba6713">xenophobic language</a>&nbsp;in public comments when referring to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/coronavirus-pandemic">the coronavirus</a>.

This memorandum will direct Health and Human Services officials to consider issuing guidance describing best practices to advance cultural competency and sensitivity toward Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders in the federal government’s COVID-19 response. It also directs the Department of Justice to partner with AAPI communities to prevent hate crimes and harassment.

The latest executive actions come after Biden signed an order Monday reversing a Trump-era Pentagon policy that largely barred&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-reverse-ban-transgender-military-f0ace4f9866e0ca0df021eba75b3af20">transgender people</a>&nbsp;from serving in the military. Last week, he signed an order reversing Trump’s ban on travelers from several predominantly Muslim and African countries.

Biden last week also directed law enforcement and intelligence officials in his administration to study the threat of domestic violent extremism in the United States, an undertaking launched weeks after a mob of insurgents loyal to Trump, including some connected to white supremacist groups, stormed the U.S. Capitol.

White House domestic policy adviser Susan Rice said Biden sees addressing equity issues as also good for the nation’s bottom line. She cited a Citigroup study from last year that U.S. gross domestic product lost $16 trillion over the last 20 years as a result of discriminatory practices in a range of areas, including in education and access to business loans. The same study finds the U.S. economy would be boosted by $5 trillion over the next five years if it addressed issues of discrimination in areas such as education and access to business loans.

“Building a more equitable economy is essential if Americans are going to compete and thrive in the 21st century,” Rice added.

Biden’s victory over Trump in several battleground states, including Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, was fueled by strong Black voter turnout.

Throughout his campaign and transition, Biden promised that his administration would keep issues of equity — as well as climate change, another issue he views as an existential crisis — in the shaping of all policy considerations.

Biden, who followed through on early promise to pick a woman to serve as&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/kamala-harris-vice-president-f86d6be83bf83fe9b823ae7e21f94796">vice president</a>, has also sought to spotlight the diversity of his Cabinet selections.

On Monday, the Senate confirmed Biden’s pick for treasury secretary, Janet Yellen, who is the first woman to lead the department. Last week, the Senate confirmed Lloyd Austin as the nation’s first Black defense secretary.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/1/1611700794973.png" alt="President Biden sees addressing equity issues as also good for the nation’s bottom line. -photo courtesy White House" />
 <figcaption>President Biden sees addressing equity issues as also good for the nation’s bottom line. -photo courtesy White House</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON— (AP) President Joe Biden on Tuesday ordered the Department of Justice to end its reliance on private prisons and acknowledge the central role government has played in implementing discriminatory housing policies.In remarks before signing the order, Biden said the U.S. government needs to change “its whole approach” on the issue of racial equity. He added that the nation is less prosperous and secure because of the scourge of systemic racism.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/1/1611700891419.png" alt="Image Courtesy White House" />
 <figcaption>Image Courtesy White House</figcaption>
 </figure>“We must change now,” the president said. “I know it’s going to take time, but I know we can do it. And I firmly believe the nation is ready to change. But government has to change as well.”Biden rose to the presidency during a year of intense reckoning on institutional racism in the U.S. The moves announced on Tuesday reflect his efforts to follow through with campaign pledges to combat&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/racial-injustice">racial injustice.</a>Beyond calling on the Justice Department to curb the use of private prisons and address housing discrimination, the new orders will recommit the federal government to respect tribal sovereignty and disavow discrimination against the Asian American and Pacific Islander community over the coronavirus pandemic.Biden directed the Department of Housing and Urban Development in a memorandum to take steps to promote equitable housing policy. The memorandum calls for HUD to examine the effects of Trump regulatory actions that may have undermined fair housing policies and laws.Months before the November election, the Trump administration rolled back an Obama-era rule that required communities that wanted to receive HUD funding to document and report patterns of racial bias.The order to end the reliance on privately-run prisons directs the attorney general not to renew Justice Department contracts with privately operated criminal detention facilities. The move will effectively revert the Justice Department to the same posture it held at the end of the Obama administration.“This is a first step to stop corporations from profiting off of incarceration,” Biden said.The more than 14,000 federal inmates housed at privately-managed facilities represent a fraction of the nearly 152,000 federal inmates currently incarcerated.The federal Bureau of Prisons had already opted not to renew some private prison contracts in recent months as the number of inmates dwindled and thousands were released to home confinement because of the coronavirus pandemic.GEO Group, a private company that operates federal prisons, called the Biden order “a solution in search of a problem. ”“Given the steps the BOP had already announced, today’s Executive Order merely represents a political statement, which could carry serious negative unintended consequences, including the loss of hundreds of jobs and negative economic impact for the communities where our facilities are located, which are already struggling economically due to the COVID pandemic,” a GEO Group spokesperson said in a statement.David Fathi, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s National Prison Project, noted that the order does not end the federal government’s reliance on privately-run immigration detention centers.“The order signed today is an important first step toward acknowledging the harm that has been caused and taking actions to repair it, but President Biden has an obligation to do more, especially given his history and promises,” Fathi said.The memorandum highlighting xenophobia against Asian Americans is in large part a reaction to what White House officials say was offensive and dangerous rhetoric from the Trump administration. Trump, throughout the pandemic, repeatedly used&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/a7c233f0b3bcdb72c06cca6271ba6713">xenophobic language</a>&nbsp;in public comments when referring to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/coronavirus-pandemic">the coronavirus</a>.This memorandum will direct Health and Human Services officials to consider issuing guidance describing best practices to advance cultural competency and sensitivity toward Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders in the federal government’s COVID-19 response. It also directs the Department of Justice to partner with AAPI communities to prevent hate crimes and harassment.The latest executive actions come after Biden signed an order Monday reversing a Trump-era Pentagon policy that largely barred&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-reverse-ban-transgender-military-f0ace4f9866e0ca0df021eba75b3af20">transgender people</a>&nbsp;from serving in the military. Last week, he signed an order reversing Trump’s ban on travelers from several predominantly Muslim and African countries.Biden last week also directed law enforcement and intelligence officials in his administration to study the threat of domestic violent extremism in the United States, an undertaking launched weeks after a mob of insurgents loyal to Trump, including some connected to white supremacist groups, stormed the U.S. Capitol.White House domestic policy adviser Susan Rice said Biden sees addressing equity issues as also good for the nation’s bottom line. She cited a Citigroup study from last year that U.S. gross domestic product lost $16 trillion over the last 20 years as a result of discriminatory practices in a range of areas, including in education and access to business loans. The same study finds the U.S. economy would be boosted by $5 trillion over the next five years if it addressed issues of discrimination in areas such as education and access to business loans.“Building a more equitable economy is essential if Americans are going to compete and thrive in the 21st century,” Rice added.Biden’s victory over Trump in several battleground states, including Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, was fueled by strong Black voter turnout.Throughout his campaign and transition, Biden promised that his administration would keep issues of equity — as well as climate change, another issue he views as an existential crisis — in the shaping of all policy considerations.Biden, who followed through on early promise to pick a woman to serve as&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/kamala-harris-vice-president-f86d6be83bf83fe9b823ae7e21f94796">vice president</a>, has also sought to spotlight the diversity of his Cabinet selections.On Monday, the Senate confirmed Biden’s pick for treasury secretary, Janet Yellen, who is the first woman to lead the department. Last week, the Senate confirmed Lloyd Austin as the nation’s first Black defense secretary.___

President Biden takes action to advance racial equality 

DOUGLAS COUNTY —Law enforcement authorities are investigating a man's death in Douglas County.

Just after 9:30p.m. Monday, police were dispatched to the 100 block of Ames Street in Baldwin City in reference to a disturbance with weapons, according to a media release.

 While Baldwin City Police Officers and Douglas County Sheriff Deputies responded to the area, a 25-year-old female victim provided information that her 31-year-old boyfriend had fired a shotgun at her during an argument.

 The victim was able to leave the duplex and seek help at a neighbor’s residence.&nbsp; Officers and deputies tried to contact her boyfriend at the residence and received no response. 

 With the assistance of the Sheriff’s Office K9, officers entered the residence and found the boyfriend dead of an apparent gunshot wound, according to the release.&nbsp; A full investigation is underway to determine all the circumstances surrounding the incident. Police have not released the name of the man who died.

DOUGLAS COUNTY —Law enforcement authorities are investigating a man's death in Douglas County.Just after 9:30p.m. Monday, police were dispatched to the 100 block of Ames Street in Baldwin City in reference to a disturbance with weapons, according to a media release. While Baldwin City Police Officers and Douglas County Sheriff Deputies responded to the area, a 25-year-old female victim provided information that her 31-year-old boyfriend had fired a shotgun at her during an argument. The victim was able to leave the duplex and seek help at a neighbor’s residence.&nbsp; Officers and deputies tried to contact her boyfriend at the residence and received no response. With the assistance of the Sheriff’s Office K9, officers entered the residence and found the boyfriend dead of an apparent gunshot wound, according to the release.&nbsp; A full investigation is underway to determine all the circumstances surrounding the incident. Police have not released the name of the man who died.

Police: Kan. man who fired shotgun at girlfriend found dead

TOPEKA&nbsp;– Governor Laura Kelly announced Tuesday that county allocation data is now available on Kansas’ COVID-19 <a href="https://www.kansasvaccine.gov/158/Data">vaccine dashboard.</a> A collaboration with the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, the COVID-19 dashboard will be updated Monday, Wednesday and Friday by 12:30 PM.

“I am pleased to announce county-specific allocation data is now available on our <a href="https://www.kansasvaccine.gov/158/Data">vaccine dashboard,</a>” said Governor Laura Kelly. “My administration is prioritizing transparency and communication with public health officials and Kansans to deliver vaccines quickly and efficiently. As we progress through Phase 2 of our vaccination framework, I encourage Kansans to visit KansasVaccine.Gov or contact their local public health departments to learn more about signing up for the vaccine.”

As of January 25, Kansas has reported 132,145, people vaccinated, 157,520 total vaccine doses administered and 255, 550 vaccine doses distributed.

<a href="https://www.kansasvaccine.gov/158/Data">Click here </a>to view the vaccine data

TOPEKA&nbsp;– Governor Laura Kelly announced Tuesday that county allocation data is now available on Kansas’ COVID-19 <a href="https://www.kansasvaccine.gov/158/Data">vaccine dashboard.</a> A collaboration with the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, the COVID-19 dashboard will be updated Monday, Wednesday and Friday by 12:30 PM.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">My administration has prioritized transparency and communication with public health officials and Kansans to deliver vaccines quickly and efficiently. To further this effort, you may now view county-specific allocation data on our vaccine dashboard. <a href="https://t.co/HwbkZ5fQj9">https://t.co/HwbkZ5fQj9</a>&mdash; Governor Laura Kelly (@GovLauraKelly) <a href="https://twitter.com/GovLauraKelly/status/1354124014311116800?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 26, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>“I am pleased to announce county-specific allocation data is now available on our <a href="https://www.kansasvaccine.gov/158/Data">vaccine dashboard,</a>” said Governor Laura Kelly. “My administration is prioritizing transparency and communication with public health officials and Kansans to deliver vaccines quickly and efficiently. As we progress through Phase 2 of our vaccination framework, I encourage Kansans to visit KansasVaccine.Gov or contact their local public health departments to learn more about signing up for the vaccine.”As of January 25, Kansas has reported 132,145, people vaccinated, 157,520 total vaccine doses administered and 255, 550 vaccine doses distributed.<a href="https://www.kansasvaccine.gov/158/Data">Click here </a>to view the vaccine data

Vaccine data for your county available on Kansas website

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused a church’s request to enter a legal battle over the government’s authority to limit the size of religious gatherings amid the COVID-19 pandemic — after the church won an appeals court ruling last month that found Nevada’s restrictions unconstitutional.

Attorneys general from 19 other states had recently joined in support of the unusual request from Calvary Chapel Dayton Valley east of Reno.

They were urging the Supreme Court to rule on the merits of the Nevada case to help bring uniformity to various standards courts across the country have used to balance the interests of public safety and freedom of religion.

The church’s lawyers said in a court filing last Thursday they wanted the high court to “clarify for all that the First Amendment does not allow government officials to use COVID-19 as an excuse to treat churches and their worshippers worse than secular establishments and their patrons.”

In a 5-4 decision in June, the Supreme Court refused Calvary Chapel’s request for an emergency injunction blocking enforcement of Nevada’s attendance limit at houses of worship.

But the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled in favor of the church last month, finding it was unconstitutional for Nevada to treat casinos and other businesses more favorably than churches.

The church’s latest plea for relief from the Supreme Court was in the form of a petition for a review of the case on its merits. Such petitions are rare and their approval is even rarer, even though they require approval by only four justices.

The justices denied the request without explanation on Monday.

The 9th Circuit ruling sent the case back to the district court to determine how to proceed but in the meantime prevented the state from enforcing any church attendance limit more stringent than the current 25% of capacity limit on most businesses.

Judge Richard Boulware put the case on hold pending the Supreme Court’s ruling on the church’s petition. He instructed lawyers on both sides to provide an update on the status of any future filings planned within seven days of such a ruling.

Lawyers for the church said Monday they were disappointed in the high court’s refusal to review the case. But they said the appellate court has made it clear government responses to COVID-19 “cannot treat churches worse than similarly situated businesses,” at least in the 9th Circuit, which also includes Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho and Montana.

“We asked the Supreme Court to hear the case so there would be a national ruling confirming what the 9th Circuit held in December: government officials certainly have the authority to protect health and public safety, but the First Amendment — including the free exercise of religion — is never suspended,” said David Cortman, senior counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom.

“Although this victory for religious liberty remains a 9th Circuit matter, we are confident that Nevada will agree to a permanent injunction on the terms that the 9th Circuit unanimously announced, and we look forward to resolving this case soon,” he said Monday in a statement emailed to AP.

Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford had argued the justices should let the federal court in Reno sort out the details before taking the extraordinary step of wading into the case. He wrote in court documents submitted last week the case “is a poor vehicle for addressing questions beyond those the Ninth Circuit already resolved in Calvary’s favor.”

Ashley Forest, a spokeswoman for Ford’s office, said in an email on Monday that “while the Supreme Court won’t hear the church’s COVID case regarding attendance limits, Nevada heard the 9th Circuit clearly and appreciates the guidance on how best to protect this constitutional right.”

Indoor religious gatherings in Nevada most recently had been subject to a hard cap of 50 churchgoers while attendance limits at many businesses including casinos were based on a percentage of the buildings’ fire-code capacities.

Nevada currently imposes the 25% occupancy limit on all gathering places — including casinos, restaurants, bars, amusement and theme parks, gyms and fitness facilities and movie theaters.

The church’s latest court filings argued that an attendance limit of 25% for houses of worship is prohibited under the First Amendment. It wants to be treated the same as essential businesses — like manufacturing facilities and professional offices, which currently have no capacity limits other than social distancing.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused a church’s request to enter a legal battle over the government’s authority to limit the size of religious gatherings amid the COVID-19 pandemic — after the church won an appeals court ruling last month that found Nevada’s restrictions unconstitutional.Attorneys general from 19 other states had recently joined in support of the unusual request from Calvary Chapel Dayton Valley east of Reno.They were urging the Supreme Court to rule on the merits of the Nevada case to help bring uniformity to various standards courts across the country have used to balance the interests of public safety and freedom of religion.The church’s lawyers said in a court filing last Thursday they wanted the high court to “clarify for all that the First Amendment does not allow government officials to use COVID-19 as an excuse to treat churches and their worshippers worse than secular establishments and their patrons.”In a 5-4 decision in June, the Supreme Court refused Calvary Chapel’s request for an emergency injunction blocking enforcement of Nevada’s attendance limit at houses of worship.But the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled in favor of the church last month, finding it was unconstitutional for Nevada to treat casinos and other businesses more favorably than churches.The church’s latest plea for relief from the Supreme Court was in the form of a petition for a review of the case on its merits. Such petitions are rare and their approval is even rarer, even though they require approval by only four justices.The justices denied the request without explanation on Monday.The 9th Circuit ruling sent the case back to the district court to determine how to proceed but in the meantime prevented the state from enforcing any church attendance limit more stringent than the current 25% of capacity limit on most businesses.Judge Richard Boulware put the case on hold pending the Supreme Court’s ruling on the church’s petition. He instructed lawyers on both sides to provide an update on the status of any future filings planned within seven days of such a ruling.Lawyers for the church said Monday they were disappointed in the high court’s refusal to review the case. But they said the appellate court has made it clear government responses to COVID-19 “cannot treat churches worse than similarly situated businesses,” at least in the 9th Circuit, which also includes Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho and Montana.“We asked the Supreme Court to hear the case so there would be a national ruling confirming what the 9th Circuit held in December: government officials certainly have the authority to protect health and public safety, but the First Amendment — including the free exercise of religion — is never suspended,” said David Cortman, senior counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom.“Although this victory for religious liberty remains a 9th Circuit matter, we are confident that Nevada will agree to a permanent injunction on the terms that the 9th Circuit unanimously announced, and we look forward to resolving this case soon,” he said Monday in a statement emailed to AP.Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford had argued the justices should let the federal court in Reno sort out the details before taking the extraordinary step of wading into the case. He wrote in court documents submitted last week the case “is a poor vehicle for addressing questions beyond those the Ninth Circuit already resolved in Calvary’s favor.”Ashley Forest, a spokeswoman for Ford’s office, said in an email on Monday that “while the Supreme Court won’t hear the church’s COVID case regarding attendance limits, Nevada heard the 9th Circuit clearly and appreciates the guidance on how best to protect this constitutional right.”Indoor religious gatherings in Nevada most recently had been subject to a hard cap of 50 churchgoers while attendance limits at many businesses including casinos were based on a percentage of the buildings’ fire-code capacities.Nevada currently imposes the 25% occupancy limit on all gathering places — including casinos, restaurants, bars, amusement and theme parks, gyms and fitness facilities and movie theaters.The church’s latest court filings argued that an attendance limit of 25% for houses of worship is prohibited under the First Amendment. It wants to be treated the same as essential businesses — like manufacturing facilities and professional offices, which currently have no capacity limits other than social distancing.

Supreme Court refuses to hear church's COVID-19 case

OVERLAND PARK, Kan. (AP) — A large Kansas City area school district is ditching the Braves and Indians mascots that four of its schools use.

The board for the Shawnee Mission district, which is the state’s third-largest with about 27,000 students, voted 7-0 Monday to make a change that requires mascots to be culturally and racially sensitive and appropriate.

The board then decided that the mascots at Shawnee Mission North High School and Belinder, Shawanoe, Ruston elementary schools violated that policy and will need to be replaced.

Calls for such changes have grown more insistent across the country in recent years, leading schools and professional sports teams to make changes. Thousands signed an online petition&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/kansas-coronavirus-pandemic-native-americans-3e172e37add48eb15a772afbef11eaff">last year&nbsp;</a>urging the district to drop the Indian mascot at Shawnee Mission North.NT

Kate Raglow, co-chair of the Roeland Park Racial Equity Ad Hoc Committee, spoke in favor of the policy change, saying “ethnicities are not mascots."

“They are communities with rich and diverse histories to be celebrated, not made into characters to be used as logos,” she said.

Emmit Monslow, however, urged the district against making the change.

“There is a difference between Indian imagery and the Ku Klux Klan,” Monslow said. “And you are treating these images as the same as the swastika.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2020/11/1606753229800.png" alt="Image courtesy Shawnee Mission North" />
 <figcaption>Image courtesy Shawnee Mission North</figcaption>
 </figure>OVERLAND PARK, Kan. (AP) — A large Kansas City area school district is ditching the Braves and Indians mascots that four of its schools use.The board for the Shawnee Mission district, which is the state’s third-largest with about 27,000 students, voted 7-0 Monday to make a change that requires mascots to be culturally and racially sensitive and appropriate.The board then decided that the mascots at Shawnee Mission North High School and Belinder, Shawanoe, Ruston elementary schools violated that policy and will need to be replaced.Calls for such changes have grown more insistent across the country in recent years, leading schools and professional sports teams to make changes. Thousands signed an online petition&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/kansas-coronavirus-pandemic-native-americans-3e172e37add48eb15a772afbef11eaff">last year&nbsp;</a>urging the district to drop the Indian mascot at Shawnee Mission North.NTKate Raglow, co-chair of the Roeland Park Racial Equity Ad Hoc Committee, spoke in favor of the policy change, saying “ethnicities are not mascots."“They are communities with rich and diverse histories to be celebrated, not made into characters to be used as logos,” she said.Emmit Monslow, however, urged the district against making the change.“There is a difference between Indian imagery and the Ku Klux Klan,” Monslow said. “And you are treating these images as the same as the swastika.”

Kan. school district ditches Indians, Braves mascots

SHAWNEE COUNTY — A space heater was responsible for starting a Tuesday morning Kansas house fire.

Just before 4:30a.m., crews responded to a fire in a home lat 427 NE Emmett Street in. Topeka, according to Fire Marshal Todd Harrison.

Upon arrival, fire crews found smoke and flames coming from the two-story home. 

Firefighters kept the fire confined to the home and during a primary search found one dog and one cat deceased. A preliminary investigation indicates the fire cause to be accidental, associated with a space heater.

Estimated dollar loss – $25,000.00; of which $20,000.00 is associated with structural loss and $5,000.00 associated with contents loss.

Working smoke detectors were located within the structure of fire origin, according to Harrison. There were no other injuries reported.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/1/1611672317623.png" alt="Fire crews on the scene of the Tuesday morning house fire -photo courtesy WIBW TV" />
 <figcaption>Fire crews on the scene of the Tuesday morning house fire -photo courtesy WIBW TV</figcaption>
 </figure>SHAWNEE COUNTY — A space heater was responsible for starting a Tuesday morning Kansas house fire.Just before 4:30a.m., crews responded to a fire in a home lat 427 NE Emmett Street in. Topeka, according to Fire Marshal Todd Harrison.Upon arrival, fire crews found smoke and flames coming from the two-story home. Firefighters kept the fire confined to the home and during a primary search found one dog and one cat deceased. A preliminary investigation indicates the fire cause to be accidental, associated with a space heater.Estimated dollar loss – $25,000.00; of which $20,000.00 is associated with structural loss and $5,000.00 associated with contents loss.Working smoke detectors were located within the structure of fire origin, according to Harrison. There were no other injuries reported.

Fire Marshal: Pet dog, cat die in Kansas house fire

KANSAS CITY (AP) — R&amp;B artist Trey Songz was jailed Sunday night after he scuffled with police officers during his arrest for not following coronavirus protocols and other rules at the AFC championship game in Kansas City, police said Monday.

Songz, 36, whose name is Tremaine Aldon Neverson, was released Monday while an investigation continues, Jackson County Sheriff’s spokesman LeVanden Darks said. No charges have been filed.

Songz’s representative, Sydney Margetson, declined to comment Monday.

Songz is a three-time Grammy-nominated singer. He earned his third No. 1 on Billboard’s Top R&amp;B Albums chart with “Back Home” last year. His other two chart-topping albums are “Trigga” and “Tremaine The Album.” He has also appeared in films including “Texas Chainshaw 3D,” “Baggage Claim” and he starred in “Blood Brother” in 2018.

In October, Songz&nbsp;<a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/CF-zMKTh4bA/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=embed_video_watch_again" target="_blank">posted</a>&nbsp;on Instagram that he had tested positive for COVID-19. He said he was taking the disease very seriously and urged his fans to do the same.

Kansas City police said in a statement that fans at the game between the Kansas City Chiefs and Buffalo Bills complained about a man who was not following COVID-19-related protocols and other code of conduct rules for fans, which include not being disruptive, intoxicated, or using obscene language.

The statement did not identify the man as Songz and did not say exactly which rules he was breaking.

Police said the man refused to follow orders from private security guards at Arrowhead Stadium and was asked to leave. When he refused, officers from the Kansas City police and Jackson County sheriff’s office were called and he was told he would be arrested if he didn’t comply, police said.

He punched one officer and put him in a headlock, police said.

TMZ released&nbsp;<a href="https://www.tmz.com/2021/01/24/trey-songz-chiefs-game-fight-police-officer-arrest/" target="_blank">a video</a>&nbsp;Monday that showed Songz was not wearing a mask and struggled with several officers before he was led away in handcuffs.

The video does not show how the confrontation began. Some fans can be heard yelling at officers to leave him alone.

The video shows at least one officer without a mask and others with masks not completely covering their mouth and nose.

Kansas City police told The Associated Press that officers working Chiefs games “comply with all mask mandates.”

“He clearly had his mask on prior to being assaulted and placed in a headlock,” KCPD spokeswoman Donna Drake said in an email.

Law enforcement officials said several agencies work NFL games, making it difficult to know how many other fans might have been ejected or arrested Sunday.

Earlier this month, Songz was set to perform at&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/houston-sylvester-turner-coronavirus-pandemic-bow-wow-us-news-83d3da44fe3f904924ce955699e5bd92">a concert in Houston</a>&nbsp;but police shut it down after seeing hundreds of people lining up to enter the venue, which was supposed to be operating at 50% capacity.

In 2017, Songz&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/c6ea528012e94fd38a9d8ed217744580">was charged</a>&nbsp;with felony assault and assaulting a police officer after he became upset when he was told to end a performance in Detroit. Authorities said microphones and speakers were thrown from the stage during the concert.

Songz pleaded guilty in August 2017 to two counts of disturbing the peace and was sentenced to 18 months of probation.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/1/1611674513397.png" alt="Songz whose real name is Tremaine Aldon Neverson-photo Jackson Co.&nbsp;" />
 <figcaption>Songz whose real name is Tremaine Aldon Neverson-photo Jackson Co.&nbsp;</figcaption>
 </figure>KANSAS CITY (AP) — R&amp;B artist Trey Songz was jailed Sunday night after he scuffled with police officers during his arrest for not following coronavirus protocols and other rules at the AFC championship game in Kansas City, police said Monday.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Surveillance video from the incident, including the three previous times security was called. The suspect punches the officer at about 4:44 in the video. <a href="https://t.co/npZncOfX4V">https://t.co/npZncOfX4V</a>&mdash; kcpolice (@kcpolice) <a href="https://twitter.com/kcpolice/status/1353834743159279617?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 25, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>Songz, 36, whose name is Tremaine Aldon Neverson, was released Monday while an investigation continues, Jackson County Sheriff’s spokesman LeVanden Darks said. No charges have been filed.Songz’s representative, Sydney Margetson, declined to comment Monday.Songz is a three-time Grammy-nominated singer. He earned his third No. 1 on Billboard’s Top R&amp;B Albums chart with “Back Home” last year. His other two chart-topping albums are “Trigga” and “Tremaine The Album.” He has also appeared in films including “Texas Chainshaw 3D,” “Baggage Claim” and he starred in “Blood Brother” in 2018.In October, Songz&nbsp;<a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/CF-zMKTh4bA/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=embed_video_watch_again" target="_blank">posted</a>&nbsp;on Instagram that he had tested positive for COVID-19. He said he was taking the disease very seriously and urged his fans to do the same.Kansas City police said in a statement that fans at the game between the Kansas City Chiefs and Buffalo Bills complained about a man who was not following COVID-19-related protocols and other code of conduct rules for fans, which include not being disruptive, intoxicated, or using obscene language.The statement did not identify the man as Songz and did not say exactly which rules he was breaking.Police said the man refused to follow orders from private security guards at Arrowhead Stadium and was asked to leave. When he refused, officers from the Kansas City police and Jackson County sheriff’s office were called and he was told he would be arrested if he didn’t comply, police said.He punched one officer and put him in a headlock, police said.TMZ released&nbsp;<a href="https://www.tmz.com/2021/01/24/trey-songz-chiefs-game-fight-police-officer-arrest/" target="_blank">a video</a>&nbsp;Monday that showed Songz was not wearing a mask and struggled with several officers before he was led away in handcuffs.The video does not show how the confrontation began. Some fans can be heard yelling at officers to leave him alone.The video shows at least one officer without a mask and others with masks not completely covering their mouth and nose.Kansas City police told The Associated Press that officers working Chiefs games “comply with all mask mandates.”“He clearly had his mask on prior to being assaulted and placed in a headlock,” KCPD spokeswoman Donna Drake said in an email.Law enforcement officials said several agencies work NFL games, making it difficult to know how many other fans might have been ejected or arrested Sunday.Earlier this month, Songz was set to perform at&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/houston-sylvester-turner-coronavirus-pandemic-bow-wow-us-news-83d3da44fe3f904924ce955699e5bd92">a concert in Houston</a>&nbsp;but police shut it down after seeing hundreds of people lining up to enter the venue, which was supposed to be operating at 50% capacity.In 2017, Songz&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/c6ea528012e94fd38a9d8ed217744580">was charged</a>&nbsp;with felony assault and assaulting a police officer after he became upset when he was told to end a performance in Detroit. Authorities said microphones and speakers were thrown from the stage during the concert.Songz pleaded guilty in August 2017 to two counts of disturbing the peace and was sentenced to 18 months of probation.

🎥R&B artist arrested at Chiefs title game after scuffle with police

By TOM SHINE <a href="https://www.kmuw.org/post/get-paid-get-vaccinated-how-one-economist-proposes-we-reach-herd-immunity">Kansas News Service</a>

Like a lot of people, Bob Litan and his wife, Margaret, have been cooped up in their Lawrence home during the pandemic.

Other than the occasional walk and visit to the doctor’s office, they’ve been indoors for nearly a year.

Vaccinations have begun, but Litan says he’s concerned not enough people will voluntarily get one.

Litan
 is a non-resident senior fellow in economic studies at the Brookings 
Institution, a public policy organization based in Washington, D.C.

He said he did some "back-of-the-envelope calculations" that showed 
about 250 million people will need to get vaccinated for the country to 
reach herd immunity and return to life pre-pandemic.

But if not enough people voluntarily step forward, Litan is <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/want-herd-immunity-pay-people-to-take-the-vaccine/" target="_blank">proposing a kind of Plan B</a>:
 He says the government should pay people to take the vaccine — $200 
when people get the shot, and another $800 when the country reaches herd
 immunity.

Litan was born in McPherson and grew up in Wichita. He has a law degree and doctorate in economics from Yale University.&nbsp;

He
 talked with Tom Shine and The Range about his plan, why the cost is 
worth it and what it says about our current political climate that 
people may skip the vaccine.

The interview was edited for length and clarity.

Tom Shine: Give us a general outline of your thoughts on paying people to take the vaccine.

Bob Litan: So last August I <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/want-herd-immunity-pay-people-to-take-the-vaccine/" target="_blank">wrote a piece</a>
 that came out of really conversations with my wife. We're both in the 
70 age group, and we're talking to ourselves, we're saying, 'How are we 
ever going to get out of the house if not enough people take the 
vaccine?'

And so the only two ways you can really get there are 
either mandating people to take the shot, which I think in this current 
environment would probably come close to inciting a revolution, or a 
monetary inducement. And that's what led me to propose $1,000 per 
person.

You call your idea Plan B; Plan A being that 
enough people would agree on their own to take the vaccine. … You're not
 confident that we'll hit that mark to get to herd immunity.

Well,
 I'm really glad you mentioned Plan B because it is a Plan B. I'm not 
advocating that tomorrow the administration roll out with this plan 
because we ought to give public health officials and the administration 
and other people … a chance to encourage people to voluntarily take the 
vaccine And the reason we need a Plan B is what happens if we don't get 
there?

Your plan would cost about $250 billion … but you've argued that still makes economic sense. Explain that a little bit.

Basically
 it's money to pay the country and ourselves to get the economy back to 
full employment. Because if we don't reach herd immunity, we're going to
 be at a sub-optimal level of economic output and employment, and 
therefore sub-optimal amount of tax revenue and just not having our 
lives back.

And for $250 billion, I know it sounds like a lot of 
money, but you know, we're talking about trillions now of helping people
 in various rescue packages. And if we could just do this once and for 
all, and just get rid of this thing, I think that it would be money that
 would be well worth it.

There's been critics of your 
plan, which is not a surprise. The most common one I see is that 
offering payments somehow sends a signal that the government is unsure 
that this vaccine is totally safe. What are your thoughts on that 
particular line of thinking?

It would be a concern if 
this were Plan A, in other words, we were doing it now. And if you were 
worried about turning people off, then you wouldn't want to do it at the
 beginning.

But when you couch the plan as a Plan B, which is 
basically after all the voluntary people are done, then the question is:
 What do you have to lose at that point? You've got a good portion of 
the country that has not taken the shot when they had the chance to do 
so. It's not as if now all of a sudden they're going to change their 
mind.

So it's not as if we're going to make things worse. We can 
only make things better as a Plan B because then we can switch some 
people who were on the fence. They would say to themselves, 'You know, 
for $1,000' — and by the way, for a family of four that's $4,000, that's
 a lot of money to kiss away — 'we'll take the money and take the shot.'

Is there a precedent in our history or in the world's history for this type of a plan?

Not
 in the U.S., but there are examples in less-developed countries for 
paying people to take vaccines in a lot lower amount. But we haven't had
 something like this since 1918.

We haven't had a program to 
actually pay people, but then we haven't been as divided as we have 
been. So this is not like polio back in the 1950s … and there was no 
mass resistance. People did it, but now you got a lot of people who 
don't trust science. They don't trust the government. They don't trust 
doctors.

And in a world of very low trust, the only way I can 
think of to overcome that is to actually pay people to overcome it. It's
 the price we have to pay for our political division if we really want 
to get out of this mess.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/1/1611587728185.png" alt="U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Europe District, flickr Creative Commons" />
 <figcaption>U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Europe District, flickr Creative Commons</figcaption>
 </figure>By TOM SHINE <a href="https://www.kmuw.org/post/get-paid-get-vaccinated-how-one-economist-proposes-we-reach-herd-immunity">Kansas News Service</a>Like a lot of people, Bob Litan and his wife, Margaret, have been cooped up in their Lawrence home during the pandemic.Other than the occasional walk and visit to the doctor’s office, they’ve been indoors for nearly a year.Vaccinations have begun, but Litan says he’s concerned not enough people will voluntarily get one.Litan
 is a non-resident senior fellow in economic studies at the Brookings 
Institution, a public policy organization based in Washington, D.C.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/1/1611587789252.png" alt=" Bob Litan is a non-resident senior fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution. He's proposing the government pays people to get vaccinated for COVID-19: $200 to get the first dose, and $800 when the country reaches herd immunity. Credit Courtesy" />
 <figcaption> Bob Litan is a non-resident senior fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution. He's proposing the government pays people to get vaccinated for COVID-19: $200 to get the first dose, and $800 when the country reaches herd immunity. Credit Courtesy</figcaption>
 </figure>He said he did some "back-of-the-envelope calculations" that showed 
about 250 million people will need to get vaccinated for the country to 
reach herd immunity and return to life pre-pandemic.But if not enough people voluntarily step forward, Litan is <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/want-herd-immunity-pay-people-to-take-the-vaccine/" target="_blank">proposing a kind of Plan B</a>:
 He says the government should pay people to take the vaccine — $200 
when people get the shot, and another $800 when the country reaches herd
 immunity.Litan was born in McPherson and grew up in Wichita. He has a law degree and doctorate in economics from Yale University.&nbsp;He
 talked with Tom Shine and The Range about his plan, why the cost is 
worth it and what it says about our current political climate that 
people may skip the vaccine.The interview was edited for length and clarity.Tom Shine: Give us a general outline of your thoughts on paying people to take the vaccine.Bob Litan: So last August I <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/want-herd-immunity-pay-people-to-take-the-vaccine/" target="_blank">wrote a piece</a>
 that came out of really conversations with my wife. We're both in the 
70 age group, and we're talking to ourselves, we're saying, 'How are we 
ever going to get out of the house if not enough people take the 
vaccine?'And so the only two ways you can really get there are 
either mandating people to take the shot, which I think in this current 
environment would probably come close to inciting a revolution, or a 
monetary inducement. And that's what led me to propose $1,000 per 
person.You call your idea Plan B; Plan A being that 
enough people would agree on their own to take the vaccine. … You're not
 confident that we'll hit that mark to get to herd immunity.Well,
 I'm really glad you mentioned Plan B because it is a Plan B. I'm not 
advocating that tomorrow the administration roll out with this plan 
because we ought to give public health officials and the administration 
and other people … a chance to encourage people to voluntarily take the 
vaccine And the reason we need a Plan B is what happens if we don't get 
there?Your plan would cost about $250 billion … but you've argued that still makes economic sense. Explain that a little bit.Basically
 it's money to pay the country and ourselves to get the economy back to 
full employment. Because if we don't reach herd immunity, we're going to
 be at a sub-optimal level of economic output and employment, and 
therefore sub-optimal amount of tax revenue and just not having our 
lives back.And for $250 billion, I know it sounds like a lot of 
money, but you know, we're talking about trillions now of helping people
 in various rescue packages. And if we could just do this once and for 
all, and just get rid of this thing, I think that it would be money that
 would be well worth it.There's been critics of your 
plan, which is not a surprise. The most common one I see is that 
offering payments somehow sends a signal that the government is unsure 
that this vaccine is totally safe. What are your thoughts on that 
particular line of thinking?It would be a concern if 
this were Plan A, in other words, we were doing it now. And if you were 
worried about turning people off, then you wouldn't want to do it at the
 beginning.But when you couch the plan as a Plan B, which is 
basically after all the voluntary people are done, then the question is:
 What do you have to lose at that point? You've got a good portion of 
the country that has not taken the shot when they had the chance to do 
so. It's not as if now all of a sudden they're going to change their 
mind.So it's not as if we're going to make things worse. We can 
only make things better as a Plan B because then we can switch some 
people who were on the fence. They would say to themselves, 'You know, 
for $1,000' — and by the way, for a family of four that's $4,000, that's
 a lot of money to kiss away — 'we'll take the money and take the shot.'Is there a precedent in our history or in the world's history for this type of a plan?Not
 in the U.S., but there are examples in less-developed countries for 
paying people to take vaccines in a lot lower amount. But we haven't had
 something like this since 1918.We haven't had a program to 
actually pay people, but then we haven't been as divided as we have 
been. So this is not like polio back in the 1950s … and there was no 
mass resistance. People did it, but now you got a lot of people who 
don't trust science. They don't trust the government. They don't trust 
doctors.And in a world of very low trust, the only way I can 
think of to overcome that is to actually pay people to overcome it. It's
 the price we have to pay for our political division if we really want 
to get out of this mess.

Get paid to get vaccinated? Economist offers herd immunity idea

ROME (AP) — The Vatican has essentially slapped a retired U.S. bishop on the wrist for “flagrant" imprudent behavior with teenagers, even though a diocesan review board determined a half-dozen allegations of sexual abuse against him were credible.

<a href="https://kcsjcatholic.org/2021/01/update-allegations-bp-hart/">Click here to read </a>a statement from the Diocese of Kansas City&nbsp; on the news.

The Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith cleared retired Cheyenne, Wyoming Bishop Joseph Hart of seven accusations abuse, determined that five others couldn’t be proven “with moral certitude” and that two cases involving boys, who were 16 and 17, couldn’t be prosecuted given the Catholic Church didn’t consider them minors at the time of the alleged abuse, the diocese reported Monday. Another allegation wasn’t addressed in the decree.

Hart, 89, had long maintained his innocence and denied all allegations of misconduct.

The Vatican decision clearly disappointed Hart’s successor, Bishop Steven Biegler, who stressed that the Vatican’s findings didn’t mean Hart was innocent, just that the Holy See determined that the high burden of proof hadn’t been met.

Biegler has previously stood by the findings of his review board, and a diocesan statement noted the qualifications of its members: “law enforcement; school administration; a doctor of psychology; a pediatrician; a psychotherapist, who treats sexually abused children; and a judge, who was a criminal prosecutor for 13 years involving crimes against children, primarily child sexual abuse.”

On the other hand, the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, or CDF, relies on the judgment of priests and bishop canon lawyers, and ultimately the pope. The Vatican for decades has been blasted by victims’ groups for giving bishops a pass when they have been accused of sexual abuse themselves or of covering it up.

A few exceptions have been made in recent years, most famously in the case of ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, who was defrocked after the CDF determined he had abused minors as well as adults, including during confession — essentially the same allegations against Hart.

As a result, the sentence showed the arbitrary nature of Vatican’s canonical sex abuse judgments, which aren't public. Hart’s previous diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph reached court settlements years ago with at least 10 victims. But Wyoming criminal prosecutors also decided last year not to proceed with charging Hart.

In its decree, the CDF rebuked Hart “for his flagrant lack of prudence as a priest and bishop for being alone with minors in his private residence and on various trips which could have been potential occasions endangering the ‘obligation to observe continence’ and that would ‘give rise to scandal among the faithful,'” the diocese said.

Hart was also rebuked for failing to observe previous Vatican restrictions prohibiting him from having contact with minors and seminarians and from participating in public engagements, the diocese said, adding that those restrictions remain in place.

“Today, I want the survivors to know that I support and believe you” Biegler said in a statement. “I understand that this announcement will not bring closure to the survivors, their family members, Bishop Hart and all those affected.”

Hart was a priest in Kansas City, Missouri, for 21 years before moving to Wyoming, where he served as auxiliary and then full bishop from 1976 until his retirement in 2001. The first known allegations against Hart dated to the early 1960s and were made in the late 1980s. At least six men came forward in the past few years to say Hart abused them in Wyoming.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2020/3/1584382944581.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>ROME (AP) — The Vatican has essentially slapped a retired U.S. bishop on the wrist for “flagrant" imprudent behavior with teenagers, even though a diocesan review board determined a half-dozen allegations of sexual abuse against him were credible.<a href="https://kcsjcatholic.org/2021/01/update-allegations-bp-hart/">Click here to read </a>a statement from the Diocese of Kansas City&nbsp; on the news.The Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith cleared retired Cheyenne, Wyoming Bishop Joseph Hart of seven accusations abuse, determined that five others couldn’t be proven “with moral certitude” and that two cases involving boys, who were 16 and 17, couldn’t be prosecuted given the Catholic Church didn’t consider them minors at the time of the alleged abuse, the diocese reported Monday. Another allegation wasn’t addressed in the decree.Hart, 89, had long maintained his innocence and denied all allegations of misconduct.The Vatican decision clearly disappointed Hart’s successor, Bishop Steven Biegler, who stressed that the Vatican’s findings didn’t mean Hart was innocent, just that the Holy See determined that the high burden of proof hadn’t been met.Biegler has previously stood by the findings of his review board, and a diocesan statement noted the qualifications of its members: “law enforcement; school administration; a doctor of psychology; a pediatrician; a psychotherapist, who treats sexually abused children; and a judge, who was a criminal prosecutor for 13 years involving crimes against children, primarily child sexual abuse.”On the other hand, the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, or CDF, relies on the judgment of priests and bishop canon lawyers, and ultimately the pope. The Vatican for decades has been blasted by victims’ groups for giving bishops a pass when they have been accused of sexual abuse themselves or of covering it up.A few exceptions have been made in recent years, most famously in the case of ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, who was defrocked after the CDF determined he had abused minors as well as adults, including during confession — essentially the same allegations against Hart.As a result, the sentence showed the arbitrary nature of Vatican’s canonical sex abuse judgments, which aren't public. Hart’s previous diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph reached court settlements years ago with at least 10 victims. But Wyoming criminal prosecutors also decided last year not to proceed with charging Hart.In its decree, the CDF rebuked Hart “for his flagrant lack of prudence as a priest and bishop for being alone with minors in his private residence and on various trips which could have been potential occasions endangering the ‘obligation to observe continence’ and that would ‘give rise to scandal among the faithful,'” the diocese said.Hart was also rebuked for failing to observe previous Vatican restrictions prohibiting him from having contact with minors and seminarians and from participating in public engagements, the diocese said, adding that those restrictions remain in place.“Today, I want the survivors to know that I support and believe you” Biegler said in a statement. “I understand that this announcement will not bring closure to the survivors, their family members, Bishop Hart and all those affected.”Hart was a priest in Kansas City, Missouri, for 21 years before moving to Wyoming, where he served as auxiliary and then full bishop from 1976 until his retirement in 2001. The first known allegations against Hart dated to the early 1960s and were made in the late 1980s. At least six men came forward in the past few years to say Hart abused them in Wyoming.

Vatican clears former KC Bishop of multiple abuse claims

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Democrats delivered the impeachment case against Donald Trump to the Senate for the start of his historic trial, but Republican senators were easing off their criticism of the former president and shunning calls to convict him over the deadly siege at the U.S. Capitol.

It’s an early sign of Trump’s enduring sway over the party.

The nine House prosecutors carried the sole impeachment charge of “incitement of insurrection” across the Capitol on Monday night, making a solemn and ceremonial march to the Senate along the same halls the rioters ransacked just weeks ago. But Republican denunciations of Trump have cooled since the Jan. 6 riot. Instead Republicans are presenting a tangle of legal arguments against the legitimacy of the trial and questioning whether Trump’s repeated demands to overturn Joe Biden’s election really amounted to incitement.

What seemed for some Democrats like an open-and-shut case that played out for the world on live television, as Trump encouraged a rally mob to “fight like hell” for his presidency, is running into a Republican Party that feels very differently. Not only are there legal concerns, but senators are wary of crossing the former president and his legions of followers — who are their voters.&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/lawmakers-trump-impeachment-trial-b9a44a269d6cfeee28e79b46572d28a6">Security remains tight at the Capitol.</a>

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, asked if Congress starts holding impeachment trials of former officials, what’s next: “Could we go back and try President Obama?”

Besides, he suggested, Trump has already been held to account. “One way in our system you get punished is losing an election.”

Arguments in the Senate trial will begin the week of Feb. 8, and the case against Trump, the first former president to face impeachment trial, will test a political party still sorting itself out for the post-Trump era. Republican senators are balancing the demands of deep-pocketed donors who are distancing themselves from Trump and voters who demand loyalty to him. One Republican, Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio, announced Monday he would not seek reelection in 2022, citing the polarized political atmosphere.

For Democrats the tone, tenor and length of the upcoming trial, so early in Biden’s presidency, poses its own challenge, forcing them to strike a balance between their vow to hold Trump accountable and their eagerness to deliver on the new administration’s priorities following their sweep of control of the House, Senate and White House.

Biden himself told CNN late Monday that the impeachment trial “has to happen.” While acknowledging the effect it could have on his agenda, he said there would be “a worse effect if it didn’t happen.”

Biden said he didn’t think enough Republican senators would vote for impeachment to convict, though he also said the outcome might well have been different if Trump had six months left in his term.

In a Monday evening scene reminiscent of just a year ago — Trump is now the first president twice impeached — the lead prosecutor from the House, this time Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, stood before the Senate to read the House resolution charging “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

Earlier, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said failing to conduct the trial would amount to a “get-out-jail-free card” for others accused of wrongdoing on their way out the door.

Republicans appear more eager to argue over trial process than the substance of the case, he said, perhaps to avoid casting judgment on Trump’s “role in fomenting the despicable attack” on the Capitol.

Schumer said there’s only one question “senators of both parties will have to answer before God and their own conscience: Is former President Trump guilty of inciting an insurrection against the United States?”

On Monday, it was learned that Chief Justice John Roberts is not expected to preside at the trial, as he did during Trump’s first impeachment, potentially affecting the gravitas of the proceedings. The shift is said to be in keeping with protocol because Trump is no longer in office.

Instead, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D- Vt., who serves in the largely ceremonial role of Senate president pro tempore, is set to preside.

Leaders in both parties agreed to a short delay in the proceedings that serves their political and practical interests, even as National Guard troops remain at the Capitol amid security threats on lawmakers ahead of the trial.

The start date gives Trump’s new legal team time to prepare its case, while also providing more than a month’s distance from the passions of the bloody riot. For the Democratic-led Senate, the intervening weeks provide prime time to confirm some of Biden’s key Cabinet nominees.

Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., questioned how his colleagues who were in the Capitol that day could see the insurrection as anything other than a “stunning violation” of the nation’s history of peaceful transfers of power.

“It is a critical moment in American history,” Coons said Sunday in an interview.

An early vote to dismiss the trial probably would not succeed, given that Democrats now control the Senate. The House approved the charge against Trump on Jan. 13, with 10 Republicans joining the Democrats.

Still, the mounting Republican opposition to the proceedings indicates that many GOP senators will eventually vote to acquit Trump. Democrats would need the support of 17 Republicans — a high bar — to convict him.

One by one, Republican senators are explaining their objections to the unprecedented trial and scoffing at the idea of trying to convict Trump now that he’s no longer in office.

Rand Paul of Kentucky said that without the chief justice presiding the proceedings are a “sham.” Joni Ernst of Iowa said that while Trump “exhibited poor leadership,” it’s those who assaulted the Capitol who “bear the responsibility.” New Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama said Trump is one of the reasons he is in the Senate, so “I’m proud to do everything I can for him.”

Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., is among those who say the Senate does not have the constitutional authority to convict a former president.

Democrats reject that argument, pointing to an 1876 impeachment of a secretary of war who had already resigned and to opinions by many legal scholars. Democrats also say that a reckoning of the first invasion of the Capitol since the War of 1812, perpetrated by rioters egged on by a president as Electoral College votes were being tallied, is necessary.

A few GOP senators have agreed with Democrats, though not close to the number that will be needed to convict Trump.

Mitt Romney of Utah said he believes “what is being alleged and what we saw, which is incitement to insurrection, is an impeachable offense. ... If not, what is?” Romney was the only Republican senator to vote for conviction when the Senate acquitted Trump in his first impeachment trial.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/1/1611623417150.png" alt="Democratic House impeachment managers as they walk through Statuary Hall in the Capitol, to deliver to the Senate the article of impeachment alleging incitement of insurrection against former President Donald Trump-image courtesy CSPAN" />
 <figcaption>Democratic House impeachment managers as they walk through Statuary Hall in the Capitol, to deliver to the Senate the article of impeachment alleging incitement of insurrection against former President Donald Trump-image courtesy CSPAN</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — House Democrats delivered the impeachment case against Donald Trump to the Senate for the start of his historic trial, but Republican senators were easing off their criticism of the former president and shunning calls to convict him over the deadly siege at the U.S. Capitol.It’s an early sign of Trump’s enduring sway over the party.The nine House prosecutors carried the sole impeachment charge of “incitement of insurrection” across the Capitol on Monday night, making a solemn and ceremonial march to the Senate along the same halls the rioters ransacked just weeks ago. But Republican denunciations of Trump have cooled since the Jan. 6 riot. Instead Republicans are presenting a tangle of legal arguments against the legitimacy of the trial and questioning whether Trump’s repeated demands to overturn Joe Biden’s election really amounted to incitement.What seemed for some Democrats like an open-and-shut case that played out for the world on live television, as Trump encouraged a rally mob to “fight like hell” for his presidency, is running into a Republican Party that feels very differently. Not only are there legal concerns, but senators are wary of crossing the former president and his legions of followers — who are their voters.&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/lawmakers-trump-impeachment-trial-b9a44a269d6cfeee28e79b46572d28a6">Security remains tight at the Capitol.</a>Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, asked if Congress starts holding impeachment trials of former officials, what’s next: “Could we go back and try President Obama?”Besides, he suggested, Trump has already been held to account. “One way in our system you get punished is losing an election.”Arguments in the Senate trial will begin the week of Feb. 8, and the case against Trump, the first former president to face impeachment trial, will test a political party still sorting itself out for the post-Trump era. Republican senators are balancing the demands of deep-pocketed donors who are distancing themselves from Trump and voters who demand loyalty to him. One Republican, Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio, announced Monday he would not seek reelection in 2022, citing the polarized political atmosphere.For Democrats the tone, tenor and length of the upcoming trial, so early in Biden’s presidency, poses its own challenge, forcing them to strike a balance between their vow to hold Trump accountable and their eagerness to deliver on the new administration’s priorities following their sweep of control of the House, Senate and White House.Biden himself told CNN late Monday that the impeachment trial “has to happen.” While acknowledging the effect it could have on his agenda, he said there would be “a worse effect if it didn’t happen.”Biden said he didn’t think enough Republican senators would vote for impeachment to convict, though he also said the outcome might well have been different if Trump had six months left in his term.In a Monday evening scene reminiscent of just a year ago — Trump is now the first president twice impeached — the lead prosecutor from the House, this time Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, stood before the Senate to read the House resolution charging “high crimes and misdemeanors.”Earlier, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said failing to conduct the trial would amount to a “get-out-jail-free card” for others accused of wrongdoing on their way out the door.Republicans appear more eager to argue over trial process than the substance of the case, he said, perhaps to avoid casting judgment on Trump’s “role in fomenting the despicable attack” on the Capitol.Schumer said there’s only one question “senators of both parties will have to answer before God and their own conscience: Is former President Trump guilty of inciting an insurrection against the United States?”On Monday, it was learned that Chief Justice John Roberts is not expected to preside at the trial, as he did during Trump’s first impeachment, potentially affecting the gravitas of the proceedings. The shift is said to be in keeping with protocol because Trump is no longer in office.Instead, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D- Vt., who serves in the largely ceremonial role of Senate president pro tempore, is set to preside.Leaders in both parties agreed to a short delay in the proceedings that serves their political and practical interests, even as National Guard troops remain at the Capitol amid security threats on lawmakers ahead of the trial.The start date gives Trump’s new legal team time to prepare its case, while also providing more than a month’s distance from the passions of the bloody riot. For the Democratic-led Senate, the intervening weeks provide prime time to confirm some of Biden’s key Cabinet nominees.Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., questioned how his colleagues who were in the Capitol that day could see the insurrection as anything other than a “stunning violation” of the nation’s history of peaceful transfers of power.“It is a critical moment in American history,” Coons said Sunday in an interview.An early vote to dismiss the trial probably would not succeed, given that Democrats now control the Senate. The House approved the charge against Trump on Jan. 13, with 10 Republicans joining the Democrats.Still, the mounting Republican opposition to the proceedings indicates that many GOP senators will eventually vote to acquit Trump. Democrats would need the support of 17 Republicans — a high bar — to convict him.One by one, Republican senators are explaining their objections to the unprecedented trial and scoffing at the idea of trying to convict Trump now that he’s no longer in office.Rand Paul of Kentucky said that without the chief justice presiding the proceedings are a “sham.” Joni Ernst of Iowa said that while Trump “exhibited poor leadership,” it’s those who assaulted the Capitol who “bear the responsibility.” New Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama said Trump is one of the reasons he is in the Senate, so “I’m proud to do everything I can for him.”Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., is among those who say the Senate does not have the constitutional authority to convict a former president.Democrats reject that argument, pointing to an 1876 impeachment of a secretary of war who had already resigned and to opinions by many legal scholars. Democrats also say that a reckoning of the first invasion of the Capitol since the War of 1812, perpetrated by rioters egged on by a president as Electoral College votes were being tallied, is necessary.A few GOP senators have agreed with Democrats, though not close to the number that will be needed to convict Trump.Mitt Romney of Utah said he believes “what is being alleged and what we saw, which is incitement to insurrection, is an impeachable offense. ... If not, what is?” Romney was the only Republican senator to vote for conviction when the Senate acquitted Trump in his first impeachment trial.___

Trump impeachment arrives in Senate ahead of historic trial

TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) — A Kansas teenager posted a video on social media showing the setting of a blaze that heavily damaged a Topeka mall in December, a court affidavit shows.

A tip to provided the next day to Crime Stoppers led investigators to the video posted on Snapchat, The Topeka Capital-Journal&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cjonline.com/story/news/2021/01/25/court-record-video-setting-white-lakes-fire-put-snapchat/6699433002/" target="_blank">reported</a>.

Joel Sink, 18, and two other youths face charges that include arson tied to the Dec. 29 fire that caused an estimated $100,000 in damage at the former White Lakes Mall in Topeka.

The charging affidavit included two images from the video taken of the fire soon after it was set. The video had been posted by a Snapchat user later identified as Sink, the affidavit said.

Snapchat is a a messaging service in which users send each other texts, photos or videos that are usually scheduled to disappear after a few seconds.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2020/12/1609424069864.png" alt="Sink-photo Shawnee Co." />
 <figcaption>Sink-photo Shawnee Co.</figcaption>
 </figure>TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) — A Kansas teenager posted a video on social media showing the setting of a blaze that heavily damaged a Topeka mall in December, a court affidavit shows.A tip to provided the next day to Crime Stoppers led investigators to the video posted on Snapchat, The Topeka Capital-Journal&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cjonline.com/story/news/2021/01/25/court-record-video-setting-white-lakes-fire-put-snapchat/6699433002/" target="_blank">reported</a>.Joel Sink, 18, and two other youths face charges that include arson tied to the Dec. 29 fire that caused an estimated $100,000 in damage at the former White Lakes Mall in Topeka.The charging affidavit included two images from the video taken of the fire soon after it was set. The video had been posted by a Snapchat user later identified as Sink, the affidavit said.Snapchat is a a messaging service in which users send each other texts, photos or videos that are usually scheduled to disappear after a few seconds.

Affidavit: Teen posted video of setting Kansas mall fire

WASHINGTON — New First District Kansas congressman Tracey Mann has been selected to serve on the House Agriculture Committee.

On social media, Mann said, "When I ran for congress, I was very clear of my intentions to advocate for agriculture and our conservative Kansas values."&nbsp; 

As a member of the House Ag committee, Mann, who grew up on a farm near Quinter said he looked forward to rolling up his sleeves and getting to work for Kansas farmers and ranchers.&nbsp; 

"I think it's incredibly important that we think about the future and the current farm bill that expires in 2023. We've got to go advocate for our interests."&nbsp;

The House Agriculture Committee has not scheduled any meetings this week, according to their web site.

WASHINGTON — New First District Kansas congressman Tracey Mann has been selected to serve on the House Agriculture Committee.<div><iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?height=476&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FRepTraceyMann%2Fvideos%2F203725361448821%2F&show_text=false&width=476" width="476" height="476" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="true" allow="autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowFullScreen="true"></iframe></div>On social media, Mann said, "When I ran for congress, I was very clear of my intentions to advocate for agriculture and our conservative Kansas values."&nbsp; As a member of the House Ag committee, Mann, who grew up on a farm near Quinter said he looked forward to rolling up his sleeves and getting to work for Kansas farmers and ranchers.&nbsp; "I think it's incredibly important that we think about the future and the current farm bill that expires in 2023. We've got to go advocate for our interests."&nbsp;The House Agriculture Committee has not scheduled any meetings this week, according to their web site.

New 1st District Rep. appointed to House Ag Committee

By CARLA K. JOHNSON and NICKY FORSTER, Associated Press

Straining to handle record numbers of COVID-19 patients, hundreds of the nation’s intensive care units are running out of space and supplies and competing to hire temporary traveling nurses at soaring rates. Many of the facilities are clustered in the South and West.

An Associated Press analysis of federal hospital data shows that since November, the share of U.S. hospitals nearing the breaking point has doubled. More than 40% of Americans now live in areas running out of ICU space, with only 15% of beds still available.

Intensive care units are the final defense for the sickest of the sick, patients who are nearly suffocating or facing organ failure. Nurses who work in the most stressed ICUs, changing IV bags and monitoring patients on breathing machines, are exhausted.

“You can’t push great people forever. Right? I mean, it just isn’t possible,” said Houston Methodist CEO Dr. Marc Boom, who is among many hospital leaders hoping that the numbers of critically ill COVID-19 patients have begun to plateau. Worryingly, there’s an average of 20,000 new cases a day in Texas, which has the third-highest death count in the country and more than 13,000 people hospitalized with COVID-19-related symptoms.

According to data through Thursday from the COVID Tracking Project, hospitalizations are still high in the West and the South, with over 80,000 current COVID-19 hospital patients in those regions. The number of cases reported in the U.S. since the pandemic’s start surpassed 25 million on Sunday, according to Johns Hopkins University.

Encouragingly, hospitalizations appear to have either plateaued or are trending downward across all regions. It’s unclear whether the easing will continue with more contagious versions of the virus arising and snags in the rollout of vaccines.

In New Mexico, one surging hospital system brought in 300 temporary nurses from outside the state, at a cost of millions of dollars, to deal with overflowing ICU patients, who were treated in converted procedure rooms and surgery suites.

“It’s been horrid,” said Dr. Jason Mitchell, chief medical officer for Presbyterian Healthcare Services in Albuquerque. He’s comforted that the hospital never activated its plan for rationing lifesaving care, which would have required a triage team to rank patients with numerical scores based on who was least likely to survive.

“It’s a relief that we never had to actually do it,” Mitchell said. “It sounds scary because it is scary.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2019/8/1566227740565.jpeg" alt="77 percent of ICU beds were occupied in Kansas and 84 percent in Missouri, according to data from U.S Health and Human Services on Jan. 18, 2021.&nbsp; The report indicated 66 percent were occupied in Nebraska." />
 <figcaption>77 percent of ICU beds were occupied in Kansas and 84 percent in Missouri, according to data from U.S Health and Human Services on Jan. 18, 2021.&nbsp; The report indicated 66 percent were occupied in Nebraska.</figcaption>
 </figure>By CARLA K. JOHNSON and NICKY FORSTER, Associated PressStraining to handle record numbers of COVID-19 patients, hundreds of the nation’s intensive care units are running out of space and supplies and competing to hire temporary traveling nurses at soaring rates. Many of the facilities are clustered in the South and West.An Associated Press analysis of federal hospital data shows that since November, the share of U.S. hospitals nearing the breaking point has doubled. More than 40% of Americans now live in areas running out of ICU space, with only 15% of beds still available.Intensive care units are the final defense for the sickest of the sick, patients who are nearly suffocating or facing organ failure. Nurses who work in the most stressed ICUs, changing IV bags and monitoring patients on breathing machines, are exhausted.“You can’t push great people forever. Right? I mean, it just isn’t possible,” said Houston Methodist CEO Dr. Marc Boom, who is among many hospital leaders hoping that the numbers of critically ill COVID-19 patients have begun to plateau. Worryingly, there’s an average of 20,000 new cases a day in Texas, which has the third-highest death count in the country and more than 13,000 people hospitalized with COVID-19-related symptoms.According to data through Thursday from the COVID Tracking Project, hospitalizations are still high in the West and the South, with over 80,000 current COVID-19 hospital patients in those regions. The number of cases reported in the U.S. since the pandemic’s start surpassed 25 million on Sunday, according to Johns Hopkins University.Encouragingly, hospitalizations appear to have either plateaued or are trending downward across all regions. It’s unclear whether the easing will continue with more contagious versions of the virus arising and snags in the rollout of vaccines.In New Mexico, one surging hospital system brought in 300 temporary nurses from outside the state, at a cost of millions of dollars, to deal with overflowing ICU patients, who were treated in converted procedure rooms and surgery suites.“It’s been horrid,” said Dr. Jason Mitchell, chief medical officer for Presbyterian Healthcare Services in Albuquerque. He’s comforted that the hospital never activated its plan for rationing lifesaving care, which would have required a triage team to rank patients with numerical scores based on who was least likely to survive.“It’s a relief that we never had to actually do it,” Mitchell said. “It sounds scary because it is scary.”In Los Angeles, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center ran into shortages of take-home oxygen tanks, which meant some patients who could otherwise go home were kept longer, taking up needed beds. But the biggest problem is competing with other hospitals for traveling nurses.“Initially, when the COVID surges were hitting one part of the country at a time, traveling nurses were able to go to areas more severely affected. Now with almost the entire country surging at the same time,” hospitals are paying twice and three times what they would normally pay for temporary, traveling nurses, said Dr. Jeff Smith, the hospital’s chief operating officer.Houston Methodist Hospital recently paid $8,000 retention bonuses to keep staff nurses from signing up with agencies that would send them to other hot spots. Pay for traveling nurses can reach $6,000 per week, an enticement that can benefit a nurse but can seem like poaching to the hospital executives who watch nurses leave.“There’s a lot of these agencies that are out there charging absolutely ridiculous sums of money to get ICU nurses in,” Boom said. “They go to California, which is in the midst of a surge, but they poach some ICU nurses there, send them to Texas, where they charge inordinate amounts to fill in gaps in Texas, many of which are created because nurses in Texas went to Florida or back to California.”Space is another problem. Augusta University Medical Center in Augusta, Georgia, is treating adult ICU patients, under age 30, in the children’s hospital. Recovery rooms now have ICU patients, and, if things get worse, other areas — operating rooms and endoscopy centers — will be the next areas converted for critical care.To prevent rural hospitals from sending more patients to Augusta, the hospital is using telemedicine to help manage those patients for as long as possible in their local hospitals.“It is a model I believe will not only survive the pandemic but will flourish post pandemic,” said Dr. Phillip Coule, the Augusta hospital’s chief medical officer.Hospitals are pleading with their communities to wear masks and limit gatherings.“There just hasn’t been a lot of respect for the illness, which is disappointing,” said Dr. William Smith, chief medical officer for Cullman Regional Medical Center in Cullman, Alabama. He sees that changing now with more people personally knowing someone who has died.“It has taken a lot of people,” he said of the virus, adding that the death toll — 144 people in six months in a county of 84,000 — “has opened their eyes to the randomness of this.”The Alabama hospital’s ICU has been overflowing for six weeks, with 16 virus patients on ventilators in a hospital that a year ago had only 10 of the breathing machines. “You can see the stress in people’s faces and in their body language. It’s just a lot for people to carry around,” Smith said.“Just the fatigue of our staff can affect quality of care. I’ve been encouraged we’ve been able to keep the quality of care high,” Smith said. “You feel like you are in a very precarious situation where errors could occur, but thankfully we’ve managed to stay on top of things.”Hospitals say they are upholding high standards for patient care, but experts say surges compromise many normal medical practices. Overwhelmed hospitals might be forced to mobilize makeshift ICUs and staff them with personnel without any experience in critical care. They might run out of sedatives, antibiotics, IVs or other supplies they rely on to keep patients calm and comfortable while on ventilators.“It’s really daunting and mentally taxing. You’re doing what you believe to be best practice,” said Kiersten Henry, a nurse at MedStar Montgomery Medical Center in Olney, Maryland, and a board director for the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses.In Oklahoma City, OU Medicine Chief Medical Officer Dr. Cameron Mantor said while the vaccines hold promise, hope still seems dim as ICU cases keep mounting. The number of COVID-19 hospitalizations at OU Medicine has declined from more than 100 daily in recent weeks to 98 on Wednesday, Mantor said.“What is stressing everybody out,” Mantor said, “is looking at week after week after week, the spigot is not being turned off, not knowing there is a break, not seeing the proverbial light at the end of the tunnel.”