By Ken Epstein

Concerns remain over school board races as ‘moderates’ lead progressives

The Alameda County Registrar of Voters has released the first round of election results, though many ballots remain uncounted and results are still incomplete.

Nationally, Democrats, liberals and progressives celebrated Tuesday evening as President Donald Trump was dealt a devastating blow in the midterm election. The Republican Party lost control of the Senate and the House as “Maga” candidates were swept away not just by a ‘blue wave,’ but a ‘blue tsunami.’

In Oakland, incumbent Mayor Barbara Lee, who served two years and ran for a full four-year term, won decisively.

A proposal backed by Lee, Measure EE, also won. The Charter amendment will create a strong mayor system of government while providing the City Council with new checks and balances on mayoral power.

District 2 Councilmember Charlene Wang is leading with 65.62% of the vote. Opponent Nate Adams trails with 34.38%.

District 4 Councilmember Janani Ramachandran, ran unopposed for reelection, receiving 14,029 votes.

District 6 Councilmember Kevin Jenkins bested opponent Nancy Sidebotham and District 2’s Charlene Wang also won reelection.

Trending

Open Letter to the City Council: Tell the A’s to Stop Abusing Oakland

City Auditor Michael Houston is running unopposed for reelection and won 60,773 votes.

Progressive school board members, Jennifer Brouhard (D2) and Valarie Bachelor (D6), supported by teachers and school activists, face serious challenges from candidates backed by pro-corporate funders and the political organization, Empower Oakland.

Arielle Fleisher leads Brouhard 53.49% to 46.51%.

In District 6 with three contending candidates, Alexandra Williams leads with 38.06% of the vote. Incumbent Bachelor has 36.89%, and Leana Powell is trailing with 25.04%.

In District 4, incumbent Mike Hutchinson is narrowly leading a field of three candidates. He received 40.87% of the vote, while Kathryn Camp has 39.92%, and Sylvia Pfeiffer Williams has 19.21%.

In the races for AC Transit Board, Director Joel Young (Ward 3) leads with 53.11% of the vote, Sarah Syed (Ward 4) is ahead with 78.37% of the vote, and Murphy McCalley (Ward 5) leads with 63.07%.

Regional Transit Measure RTM, which would increase sales taxes in five Bay Area counties to shore up BART and other regional transit, was leading in five counties by a combined 62% of the vote.

Post News Group

Posts by Post News Group

History has been made in Georgia. Keisha Lance Bottoms, the former mayor of Atlanta, has been elected governor of Georgia, becoming the first Black woman in American history to win the highest executive office in any state.

Bottoms’ victory over Republican businessman Rick Jackson represents a defining moment in American politics, breaking a barrier that has stood since the nation’s founding and placing Georgia at the center of a historic political transformation.

For generations, Black women have played a critical role in American democracy, organizing communities, leading movements, mobilizing voters and shaping public policy. Yet despite their contributions, no Black woman had ever been elected governor of a U.S. state.

Until now.

Bottoms’ election also makes her the first woman and first Black person elected governor of Georgia, a state whose political history has been deeply shaped by slavery, segregation, the civil rights movement and the long struggle for equal representation.

Her victory carries particular significance in a state where Black women have been among the most influential forces in voter registration, political organizing and Democratic electoral success.

A fifth-generation Georgian, Bottoms previously served as Atlanta’s 60th mayor from 2018 to 2022. During her administration, she led the city through the COVID-19 pandemic, nationwide protests over racial injustice and a period of significant economic and population growth.

Trending

Kaiser Permanente Supports Covid-19 Prevention Efforts For People Experiencing Homelessness In Oakland

Following her time as mayor, Bottoms served as a senior adviser in President Joe Biden’s administration before returning to Georgia politics to pursue the governorship.

Her campaign focused on expanding access to health care, strengthening public education, increasing wages and addressing the rising cost of living. She also advocated for expanding Medicaid, raising Georgia’s minimum wage to $15 an hour and increasing compensation for teachers and other public employees.

Bottoms faced Jackson, a wealthy health care executive who invested heavily in his campaign and positioned himself as a political outsider. The contest drew national attention as Democrats sought to reclaim the Georgia governor’s office after more than two decades of Republican control.

The historic nature of Bottoms’ victory extends well beyond party politics.

Georgia, once at the center of some of America’s most consequential civil rights battles, has now elected a Black woman to lead its state government. It is a milestone that reflects generations of political participation, organizing and leadership by Black Georgians.

For Atlanta, the moment is especially significant. A former mayor of the city that helped shape the modern civil rights movement will now lead the entire state.

Bottoms’ election opens a new chapter in Georgia’s political history and establishes a milestone that will be remembered far beyond the 2026 election.

For continuing election coverage and results, visit AtlantaDailyWorld.com/election26.

Post News Group

Posts by Post News Group

By Tanya Dennis

A tangle of red tape and contradictions between health providers and Medicare rules have impeded an Oakland woman’s ability to recover from a stroke she had last year.

Her family – who are her caretakers – have reached out to various professionals and state and federal lawmakers for help to no avail.

At 67, Annette Henry needs inpatient stroke rehabilitation after a devastating stroke in May 2025. Since then, multiple Bay Area hospitals have denied it. She was accepted into a rehabilitation facility in June 2025 but discharged prematurely in July, in essentially the same condition.

Three hospitals where she was a patient pushed skilled nursing over inpatient rehabilitation. Two more declined referrals.

Now at home, Henry is caught in a system that measures her need for treatment against the limitations treatment should address.

Medical professionals have documented her need for a higher level of care.

In August 2025, a Medicare Quality Improvement Organization (QIO) overturned Henry’s discharge from an inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF).

Trending

200 East Oakland Residents Rally for Black Solidarity

The QIO’s independent physician reviewer found she had not received the “intensive therapy program outlined on admission,” according to the Aug. 30, 2025, determination letter. Yet the decision did not secure her readmission or guarantee continued rehabilitation.

Henry has central post-stroke pain, a rare neuropathic pain syndrome that can make movement and touch intensely painful. Her pain specialist recommended inpatient rehabilitation alongside pain management.

Nevertheless, facilities have cited her inability to tolerate three hours of daily therapy as a reason to deny inpatient rehabilitation.

That practice raises questions about Medicare coverage policy. In Hooper v. Sullivan, No. H-80-99 (D. Conn. 1989), the court recorded the parties’ agreement that denials based on numerical utilization screens, diagnostic screens, treatment norms, the “three-hour rule,” or other “rules of thumb” were not appropriate.

CMS subsequently cited Hooper in its Aug. 7, 2009, final rule (74 Fed. Reg. 39762, 39794). The policy is also addressed in the Medicare Benefit Policy Manual, Chapter 1, Section 110, and CMS’s June 1 Review Choice Demonstration for IRF Services: Operational Guide.

These authorities underscore the need for individualized assessments rather than rigid numerical thresholds.

The central contradiction is stark: the pain and disability that make rehabilitation necessary have been cited as reasons to deny it. UCSF Stanyan’s April 7 discharge summary for Henry states that acute rehabilitation unit (ARU) placement was declined for “inability to tolerate three hours of therapy daily.” Without appropriate treatment, Henry risks further decline.

Her records document complications associated with prolonged immobility.

Orthopedics documented flexion contractures of the small and ring fingers on March 19.

Chest imaging on April 1 showed bibasilar dependent atelectasis, a condition involving reduced inflation of the lower portions of both lungs. These concerns can be examined through her medical records and photographs.

“What does a ‘not reasonable’ discharge look like?” her family asks. For them, it looks like an appeal decision recognizing a problem without ensuring a remedy: repeated referrals, denials and a patient still without the rehabilitation her treating professionals have recommended.

The family has sought help from the California Department of Public Health and the federal Office for Civil Rights to no avail. They contacted U.S. Rep. Lateefah Simon in June 2025, while Henry was in rehabilitation; Senator Alex Padilla in May 2026; and Senator Adam Schiff in September 2026.

DeCuir says the family received no meaningful assistance and was redirected to the QIO or advised working with a social worker after Henry had already been discharged.

The consequences extend beyond rehabilitation. The family reports that Henry has struggled to attend in-person specialist or any appointments and needs in-person evaluation and treatment for complications, recommended evaluations, health screenings and preventive care.

Her mobility limitations have become barriers to broader medical care.  Every office tells her their office is not set up to accommodate her.  This has happened with specialty care, out-patient services, screenings and physical therapy.

Henry is a Black woman on Medicare, and her family believes her experience raises concerns about unequal access to intensive rehabilitation. Research has documented disparities in discharge to inpatient rehabilitation rather than skilled nursing, underscoring the importance of individualized review.

CMS, state regulators and healthcare providers should examine Henry’s records, assess her needs on their clinical merits and explain how the applicable coverage standards were applied, and whether they are being enforced.

Rehabilitation is not a reward for patients who can already tolerate treatment. It is care intended to help people recover function. Henry’s case asks whether a system designed to support recovery can leave a patient without a path to it.

Post News Group

Posts by Post News Group