Shyne Loses Re-Election Bid in Belize: ‘The People Have Spoken'
Shyne has lost his bid for re-election in Belize. The former Bad Boy conceded defeat in a press conference on Wednesday night (March 12).
According to Channel 5 Belize, Shyne (born Moses Barrow) was unseated by fellow United Democratic Party member and businessman Lee Mark Chang in the general election.
More from Billboard
Jonas Brothers Announce Release Date For 'Love Me To Heaven' Single
Lizzo Turns 'Pain Into Some Champagne' on Post-Heartbreak Single 'Still Bad': Stream It Now
Doechii, Durand Bernarr, Maren Morris & More Set to Attend the 2025 GLAAD Media Awards
Shyne was elected to the Mesopotamia seat in Belize City for the House of Representatives in 2020, and he eventually served as the Leader of the Opposition in the House of Representatives and the leader of the Belize United Democratic Party.
According to Channel 5 Belize, Shyne secured only 318 votes in the constituency of Mesopotamia, while Chang earned 601.
'The people have spoken. Congratulations to Lee Mark Chang — he's now the new area representative of Mesopotamia, and I wish him well,' Shyne said, according to the local news outlet. 'I was confident; that was the interaction I was having with the people, but they made a decision to go in another direction, and I respect that.'
With Shyne losing his House of Representatives seat, he's planning to resign as the leader of the Belize UDP once a new official is elected.
'I certainly will resign effective once we have a national convention to elect a new leader,' he added. 'Obviously you can't be a leader of the United Democratic Party once you're not a member of the House, and I would not want to be appointed as a senator or anything to hold on to the leadership.'
Chang was very critical of Shyne leading up to the election, reportedly referring to him as a 'cancer' in the government. 'The people are realizing they have been bamboozled,' he reportedly said on national TV in Belize.
It's unclear if the loss marks the end of Shyne's run in Belizean politics.
Shyne rose to fame in the late '90s as a rapper under Diddy's Bad Boy Records label. He was sentenced to 10 years behind bars in 2001 on assault, gun possession and reckless endangerment charges for his role in a 1999 NYC nightclub shooting that left two people wounded. He was released in 2009 after eight years behind bars and deported to Belize.
Best of Billboard
Chart Rewind: In 1989, New Kids on the Block Were 'Hangin' Tough' at No. 1
Janet Jackson's Biggest Billboard Hot 100 Hits
H.E.R. & Chris Brown 'Come Through' to No. 1 on Adult R&B Airplay Chart
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Liberia's ex-speaker charged with arson over parliament fire
Liberia's former speaker of parliament has been charged with arson over a fire at the nation's House of Representatives, local police have said. The huge blaze broke out last December, a day after plans to remove Jonathan Fonati Koffa from his role as speaker sparked protests in the capital, Monrovia. Koffa had been locked in a stand-off with his political opponents, with dozens of lawmakers voting for his impeachment in October over accusations of poor governance, corruption and conflicts of interest. Police said on Friday that there were "credible links" to suggest Koffa was "strategically involved" in the incident. Five other lawmakers have also been detained in connection to the case. Koffa has previously denied any connection to the fire breaking out. Police chief Gregory Colman said Koffa had been charged with a string of offences including arson, criminal mischief, endangering other people, and attempted murder. Colman said Koffa had used his office and staff "to co-ordinate sabotage efforts from as early as November 2023", according to news agency AFP. Koffa and several other lawmakers were summoned to the Liberian National Police headquarters on Friday as "persons of interest" in the case, local media reports. The former speaker and three sitting members of the House of Representatives were then remanded to Monrovia Central Prison on Saturday, newspaper FrontPage Africa reported. The blaze on 18 December 2024 destroyed the entire joint chambers of the West African nation's legislature. No one was inside the building at the time. The day before had seen tense protests over the plans to remove Koffa, with demonstrators including an aide to former President George Weah arrested. Several individuals, including Koffa and Representative Frank Saah Foko, were brought in for questioning by police. Foko, a prominent figure in the House of Representatives, allegedly uploaded a video to Facebook in which he said: "If they want us to burn the chambers, we will burn it." A team of independent US investigators brought in to assist the investigation concluded that the fire was set deliberately. Liberia's House of Representatives has been beset by a long-running power struggle. Although the bid to impeach Koffa fell short of the two-thirds majority required, the group of 47 lawmakers who had voted for the move unilaterally appointed their own speaker. Last month, Koffa resigned as speaker after months of political deadlock. Embattled Liberian speaker questioned by police over parliament fire Liberian speaker denies links to parliament fire
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Civics in the time of MAGA: Junior high kids get right what we adults have gotten wrong
So, I'm sitting here on a Thursday afternoon, watching a bunch of junior-high-school kids answering questions about American government and constitutional rights. And the sad irony is they know more about it than at least 90% of the politicians and elected officials I cover on a daily basis. It's called the National Civics Bee. It's like a spelling bee, but with civics. And Thursday was the state finals, held at the downtown Wichita headquarters of the Kansas Leadership Center. What made this a lot more fun than the usual 'bee' format was it was set up to allow for audience participation. Attendees (in a separate group) could play along with the competitors and test their own knowledge. I talked with Chris Green of the Leadership Center and we both agreed it would be fun to invite some of our elected officials next year to see see how they stack up against the sixth-, seventh- and eighth graders in the contest. I wonder how many would accept the challenge. The questions ranged from fairly easy, like . . . Q: A new education reform bill was introduced in Congress and successfully passed through both the House of Representatives and the Senate. What is the next step before the bill can become law? A: The president must sign the bill into law or take no action for 10 days, after which it will automatically become law. . . . to the detailed and difficult, for example. . . Q: In Federalist number 39, how does Madison distinguish between a federal and national government, and what does this distinction suggest about the nature of the Constitution as a product of the convention? A: Madison claims that the Constitution is both federal and national, with the House of Representatives representing the national and the Senate representing the federal, suggesting that the constitution will balance power between the state and national. (I got that one wrong. I picked the answer with the House representing the federal and Senate national). In addition to the multiple choice, the five finalists had to read from and answer judges' questions on an essay they wrote on a current issue, ranging from saving rural hospitals to reforming state policy on driver's license revocation. When all was said and done, Tanya Ramesh of Wichita won the competition, a $1,000 giant check, and a ticket to Washington for the national finals. Madeline Stewart of Overland Park took second and $500, while Zane Hoff of Salina got third and $250. I thought the Civics Bee was one of the coolest events I've been to in a while, so I hesitate to even bring this up, but some of the questions probably need updating in this era of MAGA. For instance: Q: How did Afroyim versus Rusk in 1967 affect the government's power regarding citizenship revocation? A: It limited the government's ability to to revoke citizenship. Afroyim v. Rusk was a landmark case that ruled: 'Congress has no power under the Constitution to divest a person of his United States citizenship absent his voluntary renunciation thereof. ' The court's revised that stance since, to allow citizenship to be revoked (called denaturalization) if it was granted on false pretenses that would have prevented it in the first place, for example, terrorists or Nazi war criminals living under false identities. Now, denaturalization has become a key part of President Donald Trump's ongoing efforts to deport as many non-white immigrants as possible, whom he accuses (echoing a former world leader named Adolf) of 'poisoning the blood of our country.' During his first term, Trump created 'Operation Second Look,' a program to comb immigrant citizens' paperwork for misstatements or errors that would allow them to be denaturalized. This term, his top immigration advisor, Stephen Miller, has vowed to 'turbocharge' Operation Second Look, which could also lead to denaturalization and deportation of American-born children of immigrants, under Trump's executive order that purports to end birthright citizenship. Another Civics Bee question that caught my attention was this one: Q: Which statement best reflects the application of federalism in the Clean Air Act, considering the following quotation, 'the Clean Air Act represents a partnership between federal and state governments to improve air quality and to protect public health.' A: The federal government sets national standards, while states can implement stricter regulations based on local needs. That's the way it's supposed to work. But it brought to mind a recent press release I got from Kansas 1st District Rep. Tracey Mann, taking a victory lap over Congress rolling back California anti-pollution regulations. At the time, I remember thinking, 'What business is this of Tracey Mann's?' given that he represents a district that sprawls from Colorado to one county away from Missouri, where there are about four times as many cows as people and the largest city, Lawrence, would be a minor suburb of Los Angeles. What he knows of the pollution challenges facing California I'm guessing would fit on a microscope slide, but he couldn't care less as long as he can own some libs and send out a press release titled: 'Rep. Mann Reverses Biden Green New Deal Policies.' When I was growing up, we didn't have civics bees. We barely had any civics education. Truth be told, most of what we ever knew about the workings of government came from 'Schoolhouse Rock,' three-minute educational cartoons sandwiched between Jonny Quest and Scooby-Doo on Saturday mornings. Cue the music: 'I'm just a bill, yes I'm only a bill, and I'm sitting here on Capitol Hill.' I can't help thinking if we'd had civics bees back then, we wouldn't be in this mess we're in today. So it lifts my heart to see these earnest young kids competing over who knows the most about the people and ideals that built America. It gives me great hope that their future will be better than the present that my generation has handed them.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Trump is trying to defang the Endangered Species Act
More than 50 years after the bipartisan U.S. Endangered Species Act was passed unanimously in the Senate and by a vote of 355 to 4 in the House of Representatives, the federal government is proposing to remove the legislation's teeth. A proposed rule by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service would remove the regulatory definition of the term 'harm' and strip away the law's regulated habitat protections, which have been proven enormously effective at preventing species extinctions. Currently, including the definition of the term 'harm' in the regulations is critical, as it specifies that habitat destruction — and not just direct killing of animals — contributes to wildlife population declines. For that reason, the proposed changes represent not a minor technicality but a fundamental weakening of species protections. At a time when the majority of the world's scientists agree that the planet is facing an unprecedented extinction crisis, the proposed reduction of protection against species extinction in the United States is both unfathomable and unacceptable. The Endangered Species Act has helped safeguard more than 1,700 species and their habitats. According to a 2019 paper published by the Center for Biological Diversity, the law has also been extraordinarily successful, preventing 99 percent of species listed from going extinct. Without regulations that protect critical habitat, we will see an increased chance of species becoming endangered and a lower chance of recovery once a species is listed as endangered or threatened, resulting in a higher rate of extinctions. Decades of scientific research, including by our own organization, consistently demonstrates that habitat is the most critical component of a species' survival and successful population recovery. For example, our long-term monitoring of an endangered secretive marsh bird in the San Francisco Estuary — the California Ridgway's Rail — has demonstrated the species' high sensitivity to changes in habitat quality and extent. With an estimated population as small as 2,000 individuals, California Ridgway's Rails remain at elevated risk of extinction if existing habitat protections are reduced. Similarly, long-term monitoring of Northern Spotted Owls in Marin County, Calif., has demonstrated that continued protection of habitat is essential to support a stable population. Another example: Research into the California Current ecosystem has consistently shown that whales, including endangered blue, fin and humpback whales, rely on specific oceanic habitats for foraging and migration. It has identified key ocean habitat 'hotspots' where critical food sources for whales, such as krill and anchovies, are concentrated. Habitat degradation from increased vessel traffic, underwater noise, pollution and warming waters has been linked to whales being displaced from their feeding areas, as well as heightened risk of deadly collisions with ships and entanglements in fishing gear. Our research demonstrates that habitat quality and protection are essential to prevent harm to endangered whale species and to support their recovery under the Endangered Species Act. Weakening habitat-based protections, as proposed, would undermine decades of scientific progress and regulatory advances aimed at conserving these iconic species. In a country where a wide range of issues have become increasingly polarized by political views, the issue of protecting wildlife remains strongly bipartisan. According to a 2024 poll commissioned by the Indianapolis Zoological Society, nine in 10 Americans think the federal government should do more to strengthen the Endangered Species Act, including 93 percent of Democratic and 83 percent of Republican respondents. The proposed regulatory change therefore contradicts public opinion in addition to decades of scientific evidence. If enacted, the proposed regulatory change would counteract the significant progress for endangered species that has been made to this point. At a minimum, we strongly urge the federal government to maintain the current regulations. The research summarized in 1995 by the National Research Council (U.S.) Committee on Scientific Issues in the Endangered Species Act still rings true today: 'there is no disagreement in the ecological literature about one fundamental relationship: sufficient loss of habitat will lead to species extinction.' The science is clear that habitat is essential for the survival of wildlife populations. Without explicit habitat protections in place, endangered species will be at much greater risk of extinction, and species not yet listed as endangered will be at greater risk of population declines and listing. For these reasons, we strongly oppose removing explicit habitat protections from Endangered Species Act regulations. Rose Snyder is director of community engagement and Liz Chamberlin is director of innovation at the California-based nonprofit Point Blue Conservation Science. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
