Why are flags at half-staff in Arizona? Here's what to know on Memorial Day
Each year on Memorial Day, flags are flown at half-staff from sunrise until noon to honor military members who died defending the United States.
After noon, the flags will be raised to the top of the staff. This is in honor of the living soldiers who continue to defend liberty and justice in the country, according to Liberty Flags.
Memorial Day, which is observed on the last Monday in May, allows Americans to remember and honor the soldiers who died defending the United States.
Here's what to know about the difference between half-mast and half-staff and why flags are flown at half-staff.
Typically, the difference between the two is where the flag is being flown. Half-mast refers to flags flown on ships, while half-staff is used for flags flown on land.
More: What does the Arizona state flag mean? From the colors to the history, here's what to know
There are specific holidays and events when flags are flown at half-staff in the United States. The Arizona state website outlines those days as:
Memorial Day, when the flag should be displayed at half-staff until noon only, then raised to the top of the staff.
Peace Officers Memorial Day, unless that day is also Armed Forces Day.
Patriot Day.
National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day.
National Firefighters Memorial Day.
U.S. presidents can also declare that flags be flown at half-staff on the death of a notable person, according to the site. In those cases, the flag would be flown at half-staff in these instances:
30 days from the death of the president or a former president.
10 days from the day of death of the vice president, the chief justice or a retired chief justice of the United States, or the speaker of the House of Representatives.
From the day of death until the interment of an associate justice of the Supreme Court, a secretary of an executive or military department, a former vice president or the governor of a state.
The day of death and the following day for a member of Congress.
The governor can also order that the U.S. flag be flown at half-staff on the death of a notable present or former government official or member of the armed forces who dies while on active duty.
In Arizona, the governor can also require that the state flag be lowered at all state, institutional and educational buildings. The law also allows the state flag to be lowered on the death of an incumbent elected state officer for seven days beginning on the day following the death of the officer.
This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Why are flags at half-mast on May 26? Here's what to know
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
2 hours ago
- Chicago Tribune
Advocates: 20% of college students are parents. Here's how we can do more to help them.
The latest national report on students who left college without earning a degree contains some sobering data: Approximately 2.1 million students stopped higher education between January 2022 and July 2023, swelling the 'some college-no degree' population to more than 43 million Americans. What's contributing to this national crisis is a higher education system that's no longer designed for what has become a traditional college student. Colleges used to be filled with students who attended class every day, could study with friends every night and go to parties on weekends because they had so few responsibilities. But for about 3 million students who are also parents, the reality is much different. These student-parents are balancing coursework with working full time, picking up their children from school and studying for long hours after their families are asleep. They're putting in every ounce of effort to obtain a certificate or college degree because they believe an education will greatly improve their lives. While 1 in 5 undergraduates are raising a child while enrolled in college, higher education remains largely structured around the needs of students without caregiving responsibilities. The outcomes speak for themselves: Just 18% of student-parents earn a degree within six years. This disparity is not a reflection of ability or ambition. It is the result of a series of obstacles — rigid class schedules, unaffordable child care, the cost of tuition and books, and the strain on mental health — that make balancing school with work, caregiving and other responsibilities nearly impossible. Without targeted support, these highly motivated learners are being set up to fail. Addressing these challenges is especially critical because student-parents are among those who stand to benefit the most from earning a degree. Data from the Institute for Women's Policy Research reveals that for every additional level of education, poverty rates for single mothers declined by an average of 33%. Yet many colleges still lack tailored resources for student-parents, leaving them to navigate a system that wasn't built for them. Just consider the impressively demanding schedules many of these learners manage each day. Student-parents often experience what researchers call 'time poverty' because there are quite literally not enough hours in the day. More than one-third of student-parents work full time. Research shows that, after work and child care responsibilities, students with preschool-aged children are left with just 10 hours per day in which they must cram in sleeping, eating and studying. Institutions and state higher education systems must move away from one-size-fits-all approaches and adopt policies that reflect the realities of student-parents' lives. For example, One Million Degrees — a Chicago-based nonprofit that uses a mix of advising, mentoring, career services and financial aid to help community college students graduate — has seen just how critical flexible scheduling can be for student-parents. Nearly one-third of our participants chose evening or weekend time slots in our recent onboarding process. Many were parents of young children who could only attend intake meetings after their children were asleep. Several told us that without these options, they might not have been able to participate at all. Greater flexibility alone isn't enough, however. Nearly one-third of student-parents live at or near the poverty line. Institutions are finding that one of the most effective ways to support these students is also deceptively straightforward: providing direct financial assistance when they need it most. Rapid, one-time financial support has proved to be a powerful tool for preventing financial setbacks from derailing a student's education. Emergency grants offer immediate relief for urgent expenses such as rent, utilities or unexpected car repairs. They prevent a short-term challenge from snowballing into a long-term crisis. A flat tire or an unexpected child care closure should not force a determined student-parent to drop out. A growing number of states and institutions are implementing interventions to help student-parents stay on track. In California and Texas, priority class registration now gives student-parents the ability to build course schedules that fit their busy lives. City Colleges of Chicago has expanded wraparound support for student-parents across the system. At Olive-Harvey College, students now have access to a child care center, children's clothing and other child care items. The college's student support office is also experimenting with flexible service hours to better accommodate students' needs. Hope Chicago is taking a two-generation approach to breaking through the barriers created by poverty for parent learners by providing scholarships plus critical wraparound support to recent high school graduates and one of their parents or guardians. For every $1 invested, the program generates a powerful economic return of 400% in economic and societal benefits, including increased family earnings and improved health outcomes. Most student-parents would only pursue a degree or certification in an in-demand field — such as health care, technology, business, education and the skilled trades — that will translate directly into a well-paying career. Institutions looking to expand their student-parent population should offer programs in these fields alongside paid apprenticeships and internships that will help them gain hands-on, marketable skills. Fulfilling the promise of higher education for student-parents yields substantial returns by enhancing their career prospects and strengthening the economic vitality and fiscal health of their families and communities. Student-parents represent a massive pool of untapped talent; they have the drive and determination to succeed. It's time for higher education to meet them where they are and provide the support they need to not only enroll but ultimately reach the finish line. Rita Raichoudhuri is the chief programs officer for One Million Degrees. Michele Howard is the chief program officer of Hope Chicago.
Los Angeles Times
2 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
We know how to coexist with bears and wolves. Will we kill them instead?
Humans have always had an emotional relationship with predators. We both revere and demonize them. We buy more than 100 million teddy bears annually for our children, while 50,000 real bears are hunted yearly in North America. Cultural fables and fairy tales simultaneously vilify and celebrate predators — from 'The Lion King' to the Three Bears to the Big Bad Wolf. In elementary school, we teach kids about the food chain and how every animal is crucial in maintaining a balanced ecosystem. Predators are often the entry point to understanding ecology for young minds, with an abundance of nature films about sharks, bald eagles, tigers and many more fascinating predators. Somewhere between elementary school and adulthood, we forget what predators teach us and how much we need them. And it is this nation's adults who need to reconcile their ideas about predators and decide if we truly want to live with the ones we once attempted to exterminate. Our capacity to erase predators is proven. Our ability to conserve and recover them is equally established. The fundamental question remains: Do we wish to live alongside them? This age-old conflict resurfaced in California recently, igniting modern tensions. This spring, the Los Angeles Times wrote several articles on predator tensions, including a suspected black bear attack in Sierra County, conflict between farmers and a handful of wolves, and ranchers pressuring legislators for permission to 'remove' wolves. Ranchers spotlighted these sparse examples by with an ominous, documentary-style video online likening the severity of the issue to investigative crime reporting. This reporting paints a picture of an intensifying war between predators and those who would hunt them, if not for California law. The reality is that these examples of predators affecting humans are extremely rare. However, these stories build up and fuel a societal bias known in psychology as the availability heuristic, whereby a person uses a mental shortcut to judge the likelihood of an event based on how easily examples come to mind. When our judgment is clouded in this way, we design wildlife policy driven by fear, not reason. Images of a calf mauled by a wolf are evocative and ignite emotional responses. The same is true of an image of a wolf caught in a snare trap slowly suffering as it struggles to free itself. The conflict among wolves, prey and people is real. The question is how to manage it responsibly. First, we need clarity on the actual harm done by predators, including wolves. Wolves do attack livestock, but statistically the risk of an individual cow being attacked by a wolf is less than 1 in 100,000 in any given year. In more than 125 years across North America, wolves have only ever killed two people. In contrast, Americans kill each other at an annual rate of 6.8 per 100,000 individuals. It is clearly safer to be cattle with wolves roaming about than it is to be a person in society. This is not to say a wolf mauling a calf is not a tragic loss for an individual rancher, but we need to reckon these sparse personal losses with the drastic ecological damage of hunting wolves to near extinction. Today, there are approximately 6,000 to 8,000 gray wolves remaining in the contiguous U.S. (down from approximately 2 million). Wolves are known as 'ecosystem guardians' or 'keystone species,' meaning they are critical to maintaining ecosystem balance. When they are systematically removed, we see increases in livestock diseases, land degradation and food chain destabilization. Given the rarity of actual wolf attacks, we must invest in solutions that protect both ranchers and predators. An example is Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers' proposal to include $3.7 million in the state budget for wolf monitoring and abatement projects. These nonlethal methods are the most effective way to ensure predators and humans coexist. According to U.S. Department of Agriculture data, nonlethal methods reduce wolf-livestock conflicts by an average of 91%. Yet in 2023, USDA's Wildlife Services devoted less than 1% of its $286-million budget to nonlethal efforts. Despite nearly equal preference among livestock producers for both approaches, the money overwhelmingly supports lethal control. It is possible to create a future in which wolves, cattle and ranchers coexist with minimal harm. However, it is not possible to imagine a world in which one side 'wins' outright without severe negative consequences. We have the resources to find a win for ranchers and a win for wolves — if the American people choose to do so. Peter Kareiva, a former chief executive of the Aquarium of the Pacific in Long Beach and a former director of UCLA's Institute of the Environment and Sustainability, is a founding member of Team Wolf, an organization focused on the long-term protection and recovery of gray wolves.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Florida gets failing grade in new plastic pollution report, calls for stronger action
The Brief A new report from the Ocean Conservancy is giving the United States a failing grade when it comes to fighting plastic pollution. The report comes as new studies show microplastics are increasingly being found in the human body, raising alarms among health professionals. TAMPA, Fla. - A new report from the Ocean Conservancy is giving the United States a failing grade when it comes to fighting plastic pollution. The environmental non-profit gave the Sunshine State a 1.5 out of 5 stars for its current efforts, saying there's significant room for improvement. The release coincides with Plastic Free July, a global campaign urging individuals and governments to cut down on single-use plastics. READ: EPA's research and development office eliminated; thousands laid off What they're saying "Four out of five Americans want to see plastics addressed," said JP Brooker, the director of the Florida Conservation Program at Ocean Conservancy. "And yet, we're only giving states an average score of 1.5 out of 5 stars." Florida earned some points in the report for steps like banning intentional balloon releases and allowing communities to ban smoking on beaches, which helps reduce litter. But, Brooker said the state still has a major roadblock: It prevents local governments from banning single-use plastic items like bags and utensils. Dig deeper Brooker said plastic pollution isn't just an environmental issue, it's also a threat to Florida's economy. MORE: Governor DeSantis signs deal to speed up Florida Everglades restoration projects He also advocates for Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) laws, already passed in seven states, that require manufacturers to help manage the waste they create. Big picture view Florida isn't alone in its low score. The Ocean Conservancy's report found that about 90% of states failed to meet basic standards for plastic waste reduction. "The U.S. is the world's number one generator of plastic waste," Brooker said. "We need to embrace a circular economy, where plastics are reused and recycled, not just thrown away." Currently, the UN is working on global trade to reduce plastic pollution. READ: Temple Terrace residents raise concerns over cancer-causing chemicals in drinking water Why you should care The report comes as new studies show microplastics are increasingly being found in the human body, raising alarms among health professionals. "The problem is even worse now," said Dr. David Berger, a Tampa-based pediatrician. "It's already in our water supply. It's in our food. Even if people start avoiding plastics today, it's still everywhere." The Ocean Conservancy's report compiled the top ten items collected on Florida beaches. The top three items were the following: Cigarettes Butts Plastic bottle caps Food wrappers Plastics straws came in at No. 7. Despite awareness campaigns, cigarette butts have remained the number one item for years, highlighting the ongoing challenge of changing public habits. The Source The information in this story was gathered by FOX 13's Genevieve Curtis. Solve the daily Crossword
