JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES

The Jobs and Infrastructure domain tracks and reports on policies that deal with job creation and employment, unemployment insurance and job retraining, and policies that support investments in infrastructure. This domain tracks policies emanating from the White House, the US Congress, the US Department of Labor, the US Department of Transportation, and state policies that respond to policies at the Federal level. Our Principal Analyst is Vaibhav Kumar who can be reached at vaibhav@usresistnews.org.

Latest Jobs Posts

Alaska (2026 Democratic Primary Preview Series Brief #2)

There are two seats up for grabs this coming election season in Alaska: the first is Alaska’s single, at-large House of Representatives seat, and the second is the Senate seat of Republican Dan Sullivan. The current delegation consists of Republican Representative Nick Begich III, Republican Senator Dan Sullivan, and Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski.

Alabama (2026 Democratic Primary Preview Series Brief #1)

The Yellowhammer State will have all seven of its U.S. House seats on the ballot in 2026, along with one of its U.S. Senate seats. Alabama’s current House delegation includes: District 1: Barry Moore (R); District 2: Shomari Figures (D); District 3: Mike Rogers (R); District 4: Tyler Aderholt (R); District 5: Dale Strong (R); District 6: Gary Palmer (R); and District 7: Terri Sewell (D).

Deconstructing “Peace”: Trump’s Settled Conflicts and the Ceasefire Illusion (Foreign Policy Brief #222)

In political discourse, the language of peacemaking is often employed for its potent rhetorical value, yet the terms used can obscure the reality on the ground. A critical distinction must be drawn between a ceasefire and a peace settlement. A ceasefire, or an armistice, is a military and temporal arrangement. It is an agreement to stop active hostilities, to put down the weapons, often temporarily and along existing lines of control. It is a pause. It does not resolve the underlying political, economic, or social grievances that ignited the conflict. A peace settlement, by contrast, is a comprehensive political and legal resolution. It is a formal treaty or agreement that ends the state of war by addressing the root causes—such as sovereignty, borders, justice, and security guarantees—and attempts to build a framework for a new, sustainable relationship.

Federal Court Blocks Texas’ Racially Discriminatory Redistricting Map (Social Justice Policy Brief #184)

In a major ruling upholding the rights of minority voters, a three-judge federal panel on November 18, 2025, issued a preliminary injunction blocking Texas from using its newly adopted 2025 congressional redistricting map for the upcoming 2026 elections. The map, enacted during a special legislative session in August, was found to be an unconstitutional racial gerrymander that harmed the voting power of Black and Hispanic Texans. The panel ordered that the elections proceed under the state’s 2021 map. Opponents, including State Senator Juan “Chuy” Hinojosa, applauded the decision, stating the map was a clear effort by the Trump administration and Texas Republicans to “silence the voices” of minority-majority districts. Texas has already filed a notice of appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Broad, Dramatic Changes Threaten the Environment as Trump Lifts Protections (Environment Policy Brief #184)

Dolphins in New York Harbor, whales breaching off Lower Manhattan, oysters thriving in the waters around New York City, and the Hudson River—long written off as dead—now supports fishing again. These signs of environmental recovery, while miraculous, all could slam into reverse as the latest Trump administration rollbacks take effect.

The Potential Harm Posed to Society Due to the Inaccuracies of AI (Technology Policy Brief #159)

The future of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is not fully determined, but it will continue to have a significant impact on our society and the way we live. The ways it currently impacts society are through improvements in efficiency, productivity, and accessibility. Self-driving cars relying on AI, AI-powered robots are used to provide aid and assistance in the healthcare system, and AI security systems are used to automate threat detection, among other examples. Although AI creates positive advantages and impacts, it also creates negative effects. The negative effects cover the environment, employment and other fields. These examples are often caused by products that use and incorporate AI, but what (potential) harm is created due to inaccuracies within the actual systems of AI?

Antisemitism Is the Weapon, Teachers are the Target (Education Policy Brief #213)

Educators who are critical of the Israeli government or the occupation, or who voice support for Palestinian statehood, are increasingly at risk of disciplinary action or even job loss. Extremist pro-Israel groups are advocating for and winning statutory and regulatory limits on educational content critical of Israel, all under the guise of fighting rampant Antisemitism. Even the use of pro-Palestinian slogans like “From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be Free” on social media has led to teachers being placed on leave. Educators and free speech advocates are organizing to fight back, and a recently approved law in California, ostensibly to curb antisemitism, is being challenged in federal court by the ADC.

« Older Entries

Alaska (2026 Democratic Primary Preview Series Brief #2)

2026 Democratic Primary Preview Series Brief #2 | Nate Iglehart | 11/29/2025

Announced Alaska Democrat Senate Candidates: Ann Diener and Mary Peltola
Announced Alaska Dem. House Candidates: Matt Schultz, and (potentially) Mary Peltola.

Announced Alaska House Candidates

Alaska has long been a Republican stronghold at the federal level, and while that still remains the case, the grip that the Republican party has on the state has begun to wane over the past few election cycles. In 2000, Democrats only received 27.7% of the vote, but that number has risen to 43% and 41% in the 2020 and 2024 elections respectively. Anchorage’s legislature and mayor have both slowly shifted to the center, and with affordability being one of the key issues this election season, Democrats may have a rare opportunity to gain some ground. The potential expiration of ACA subsidies at the end of this year is also a main sticking point, and some polls suggest that Senator Dan Sullivan’s seat may be less secure than previously thought.

Alaska is an exceedingly rural state outside of Anchorage, and takes the title of least densely populated state. However, its population of roughly 733,391 people with a median age of 35.6 years makes it one of the youngest states in the nation. This dichotomy of rural life and a young population will be a test of the Democratic platform, which has often focused more on the latter than the former. It will also make the issues of affordability more prevalent, while the ACA subsidy issue may carry less weight. The primary will be held on August 18th, with the general election following on November 3.

Announced Senate Candidates

Anna Diener

Ann Diener, 52, seems to be the main candidate for Democrats in Alaska. She is a journalist, having worked for the newspaper sales executive at the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, and only arrived in Alaska in 2021. Without experience in governance, she relies on her background in media and her time working with Les Gara’s campaign for Governor in 2022, which ultimately lost. Diener’s platform prioritizes workers’ rights, infrastructure, housing, natural gas expansion, and foreign policy. While Alaska’s Senate races rarely draw many eyes, Democrats may see this seat as one with potential to flip, as polls show that Sen. Dan Sullivan is not particularly popular. Diener may not have name recognition or an extensive resume in government, but she may have just enough relatability, bipartisan policies, and political tailwind to take the general election as the sole Democratic candidate at the moment.

Platform Priorities

Infrastructure: Building adequate roads, with a focus on improving the Dalton Highway and a full extension of the Alaska Railroad to Alberta, Canada.
Housing: Focus on building and refurbishing housing, making use of the new proposed infrastructure projects.
Agriculture and Tourism: Expanding the Alaska Grown program, which establishes farms and agriculture across the state. Also promoting tourism to the state.
Energy: Expanding the use of LNG (natural gas) along with its pipelines and other sustainable mining operations. The focus here is on lowering energy costs for Alaska’s citizens, as well as an “all-in” approach on energy that seeks to make LNG, clean coal, and other mining pursuits as sustainable and affordable as possible.

Voter & Donor Support

No data yet on available donor support, nor on Diener’s voter appeal in comparison to Sullivan.

Why She Might Win

Sullivan isn’t a very popular opponent
Trump’s endorsement of SUllivan could backfire if Trump’s popularity continues to fall
New figures in politics often capitalize in chaotic times
Energy policy that caters to Alaska’s strengths will be perceived as common sense

Why She Might Lose

Alaska is still decently Republican-leaning, and while Sullivan isn’t particularly popular, incumbency carries with it some advantages in voters’ minds.
Lack of true government experience could make Diener seem unqualified.
Media presence is minimal, with mainly a campaign website, Facebook, and a handful of other social media accounts. Also has not done an interview yet.

Key Election Variables

Sullivan’s sliding popularity and the nationwide perception of Republicans
Energy and housing costs
Extent to which dissuaded voters vote for a Democrat instead of Green or independent party candidates.

General Election Odds: Medium-low due to district partisanship, but opponent is not popular.

Primary Odds: Currently uncontested

Mary Peltola

Mary Peltola, 52, would be the other Democratic candidate for the seat, but she has yet to file to run as she navigates a lawsuit involving the death of her husband. She also may yet turn her eyes to the race for Alaska’s House of Representatives seat. Pelotla was the Alaskan Representative in the House from 2022 to 2025, after defeating Republican former Governor Sarah Palin and Republican Alaska Policy Forum board member Nick Begich III. Her win was one of many firsts, including first Alaska Native member of Congress, first woman to represent Alaska in the House of Representatives, and the first Democrat to serve as Alaska’s representative in the House since Nick Begich Sr. in 1972. If she were to run again, it’s likely that her platform would be similar to the one that she won her 2022 election with: infrastructure improvements, advocacy for Alaskan fisheries, and cooperation with the Alaska Native Communities. But without any indication that she will file for a run for the seat, it is unclear how much longer she can wait to decide if she runs for the Senate seat or for the House seat.

Platform Priorities

Fishery Advocacy: She worked to ban predatory foreign trawlers to protect salmon and worked to revise the Magnuson–Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.

Infrastructure Improvements: Her first term was marked by a $2 billion boon she helped secure from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act for Alaskan projects
Aid to Native Communities: She addressed long-standing promises to Alaska Native communities, and sponsored the Native American Millennium Challenge Demonstration Act to assist remote communities with economic development.

Voter & Donor Support

Voters and donors who are embedded in Alaska’s Democratic campaigns would know her name and know her ability to get things done.
Her bipartisan streak may gain some independent votes, but her 2024 loss showed that Republicans and Independents disillusioned by Trump and MAGA would rather vote for a third party, and could under Alaska’s Ranked Choice Voting system.

Why She Might Win

Name recognition and a history of service for Alaska already.
A growing demographic shift towards the center may lend her additional support.
Dan Sullivan is not particularly popular.
Bipartisan stances could be a welcome sight in an election that will be extremely divisive.

Why She Might Lose

Her refusal to start her campaign so far is costing her valuable money and time
Voters already showed that they preferred Dan Sullivan over her in 2024.
Alaska still remains a relatively red state.

Key Election Variables

How popular Dan Sullivan is approaching election day.
How late Peltola starts her campaign.
Voter fatigue for Trump-style politics and Trump-endorsed politicians.
The seriousness of the cost-of-living crisis, and who is blamed for it.

General Election Odds: Medium-low due to district partisanship, but opponent is not popular.

Primary Odds: High if she did run, but the later she declares, the lower her odds get.

Announced Alaska House Candidates

Matt Schultz

Matt Schultz, 53, is a progressive pastor with a decently strong online following, and he is taking his first stab at governance with this race to represent Alaska’s at-large district. As the pastor of Anchorage’s First Presbyterian Church, he has an extensive history of support for progressive policies and ideals, having spoken at Anchorage’s No Kings day rally while focusing on homelessness in Anchorage, food insecurity, and raising the minimum wage. The New York-born pastor moved to Alaska in 1997, and his work as a pastor has garnered him respect amongst Anchorage’s populace. While he has often denounced Trump, he wants to run a campaign that focuses on issues rather than people, with his key policy areas being the cost-of-living, protecting health care and medicaid, protecting LGBTQ+ rights, and growing the diversity of Alaska’s energy sector. With his name recognition alongside his progressive Christian identity, he stands out as a candidate who can reach parts of both parties while also having lived in Alaska for decades now. Both of these aspects may help him gain momentum, but that same progressive Christian identity could also backfire and make many Alaskans see him as a Democrat first.

Platform Priorities

Healthcare: Safeguarding access to health care and clinics, cutting travel and wait times, and making medicine more affordable are all key elements of Schultz’s platform. He is also in favor of continued funding for providers like Planned Parenthood.
Infrastructure and Energy: Schultz supports investment in infrastructure, including addressing issues at the Port of Alaska in Anchorage and exploring options for rail development. He also believes in a diversified energy sector in order to lower energy prices.
Social Justice: His speeches at the No Kings protests go hand-in-hand with his historical support for the BLM movement and LGBTQ rights. He also has previously advocated for an ordinance banning conversion therapy for minors, and wants to fight the rise of Christian nationalism across the nation.
Cost-Of-Living: On top of housing, Schultz says that one of the key reasons he began his campaign is the high cost of groceries, fuel, housing, and child care. He also opposes federal tax cuts for the wealthy and the cutting of social programs.

Voter & Donor Support

There aren’t any figures regarding his fundraising yet, but his identity could draw attention from Democratic donors and voters who may see a chance to flip Alaska blue or support a more progressive brand of Christianity. He also has a good media presence, both in interviews and in speeches he’s given. Importantly, her has connections through his uncle, Tom Begich, who is running for governor as a Democrat and his other uncle, Mark Begich, is a Democratic former U.S. senator. But his lack of experience could also hinder support from all sides, and his opponent has already raised a decent war chest.

Why He Might Win

Community service experience could go a long way in a rural state.
Savvy media presence and his relative youth may shine, becoming an alternative to the status quo that is guided by a set of religious moral values.
A growing demographic shift towards the center may lend him additional support.
Dan Sullivan is not particularly popular.

Why He Might Lose

Alaska is not a particularly religious state, so his pastor background might not carry enough weight.
Lack of experience and proven track record could hinder voters’ opinions of his potential.
Progressive social justice stance could alienate many voters more concerned with pocketbook issues, something that rang true in the 2024 elections.
It is unclear how good Schultz is at fundraising, and his opponent has a headstart.
Alaska still remains a relatively red state.

Key Election Variables

How popular Dan Sullivan is approaching election day.
Whether or not Peltola enters the race.
Voter fatigue for Trump-style politics and Trump-endorsed politicians
The seriousness of the cost-of-living crisis, and who is blamed for it.

General Election Odds: Medium-low due to district partisanship, but opponent is not popular.

Primary Odds: Medium-high, his identity is intriguing and his decorum could stand well against his opponents.

Recent Interviews:

15 minutes with Matt Schultz, new Democratic candidate for U.S. House

Mary Petola

Overall, Alaska may not be the most exciting race going up to the election, but Democratic campaign planners are actively eying developments as we inch towards the election. Shifting demographics, a rising cost-of-living, and some interesting candidates could mean Alaska regains Democratic representation. While the state won’t carry much weight in the electoral college, a Democratic win here would spell out the writing on the wall for the current Republican stronghold, and perhaps be a part of a larger blue wave in 2026.

Engagement Resources:

Ballotpedia – serves as an initial go to for candidates and races at all levels:

Alaska elections, 2026 – Ballotpedia

Alabama (2026 Democratic Primary Preview Series Brief #1)

Brief #1 | 2026 Democratic Primary Preview Series | Alabama | Morgan Davidson | 11/28/2025

Announced Alabama Dem. Senate Candidates: Dakarai Larriett, Lamont Lavender, Kyle Sweetser
Announced Dem. House Candidates: Clyde Jone, Shomari Figures, Lee McInnis. Amanda Pusczek, Shane Weaver, Jeremy Devito, Candice Devieilh, Greg Howard, Andrew Sneed, Keith Pilkington, Terri Sewell

Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R) would normally be up for re-election, but he’s forgoing a second Senate term to run for governor. His decision leaves one of Alabama’s Senate seats open for the first time in years, setting up what could become one of the state’s most consequential races of the cycle.

Alabama’s seven House districts reveal a stark divide between the state’s fast-growing urban centers and its aging rural regions, shaping very different political realities heading into 2026. The Black Belt anchored Districts 2 and 7 remain the most demographically diverse, with younger urban populations surrounded by older rural communities, creating the only reliably Democratic footholds in the state. In contrast, deeply rural districts like the 3rd and 4th continue to trend older and overwhelmingly conservative, while the Huntsville-centered 5th stands out as a rare pocket of youth, education, and rapid population growth driven by the defense and tech sectors. Suburban strongholds around Birmingham and Mobile add yet another layer, blending upper-income commuters with exurban sprawl. Together, these demographic contrasts set the stage for how competitive each district may be in 2026, defining where either party can realistically expand its influence. The primaries will take place on May 19th of 2026 followed by the General election on November 3rd.

Senate Candidates

Dakarai Larriett, 43, is a gay Black businessman and first-time candidate whose run for the U.S. Senate began after what he describes as a wrongful arrest that pushed him toward public service. A former Whirlpool employee who later launched his own pet-care company, Larriett frames his campaign around the everyday struggles he has seen in Alabama’s working communities. He emphasizes criminal-justice reform, better access to healthcare, stronger public education, and a jobs agenda centered on small business and economic mobility. His profile is likely to resonate with younger voters, LGBTQ+ Alabamians, and Black communities who respond to the lived experience he brings to the race. But with no prior political experience, minimal name recognition, and an uncertain donor base, Larriett starts as an underdog. His success will depend on whether his justice-reform message breaks through and whether he can build a statewide operation quickly. His chances of winning the primary remain low to moderate, and he has not yet given any major interviews.

Military veteran and community advocate Lamont Lavender entered the Democratic primary with a message focused on service, security, and economic fairness. While his age and full biography aren’t yet publicly documented, Lavender describes himself as a proud U.S. veteran and a champion for the “everyday Alabamian.” His stated priorities include lowering crime rates, securing livable wages, expanding veterans’ support systems, and pushing for affordable housing and healthcare. He also stresses transparency and government accountability as core values. Lavender’s background gives him natural appeal among veterans and working-class Democrats, especially in rural counties. However, his campaign infrastructure remains almost nonexistent: he has no public website, limited digital footprint, and no visible fundraising network. Without rapid organization and visibility, he risks being overshadowed by candidates with clearer profiles. His chances of winning the primary are currently low, and he has no publicly available interviews to date.

Kyle Sweetser, a 36-year-old construction business owner, enters the race with perhaps the most politically compelling story among the Democratic contenders. A former Republican who once spoke at the Democratic National Convention to denounce Donald Trump, Sweetser says the modern GOP “cares more about culture wars than people.” His political shift forms the backbone of his campaign- a pitch to Alabamians who feel politically homeless in a polarized climate. Sweetser emphasizes infrastructure as his core issue, arguing that roads, broadband, water systems, and rural connectivity are essential to lifting Alabama’s economy. He highlights his work-site experience and frequent conversations with working-class residents as proof that he understands the state’s day-to-day challenges. His crossover appeal could attract moderate Democrats, independents, and even disaffected Republicans, giving him a broader coalition than his rivals. The challenge is whether he can fundraise and organize quickly enough to convert that appeal into votes, but at this early stage, Sweetser stands out as the most viable Democrat in the field. His chances of winning the primary are moderate to high. No recent interviews are publicly available, though his past DNC remarks are archived.

Thirty-two-year-old chemist and emergency-response specialist Mark Wheeler presents himself as an “everyday family guy” bringing practical, science-based leadership to politics. With no prior elected experience, Wheeler leans heavily on his professional background, emphasizing environmental responsibility, clean water access, disaster preparedness, and healthcare affordability. His message focuses on pragmatic governance rather than ideological fights, positioning him as a calm, solutions-oriented alternative to political gridlock. Younger voters, STEM professionals, and environmentally focused Democrats may find his profile appealing, though Wheeler currently lacks the name recognition and organizational strength needed for a statewide campaign. His biggest hurdle is differentiating himself in a field already defined by stronger narratives; Larriett’s justice story and Sweetser’s party-switching momentum. Despite that, Wheeler could gain ground with a disciplined message and active outreach. His chances of winning the primary are low to moderate, and no recent interviews are available.

There is no polling yet on the Democratic side of this primary, but my pick is Sweetsner. His background is more appealing to key voters needed to win a deep red state like Alabama; & the disaffected Trump voter will likely resonate with voters in a midterm election where the President has historically low polling numbers. Sweetsner’s appearance at the DNC will also help him with donations & name recognition. Dakari Larriett also has a strong personal story that went viral which makes him a viable 2nd choice in the primary but either candidate will have an uphill battle against whichever Republican emerges in the wake of Tubberville running for governor. A note of interest here is Paul Finebaum. Finebaum has floated the idea of running as a Republican in this race but the current ESPN/SEC host may gather a unique coalition & govern differently than other Republicans in the race.

House Candidates

District 1 – Clyde Jones

Rev. Clyde W. Jones Jr. is a retired U.S. Army First Sergeant with 21 years of service as a Signal Communications soldier, including deployments in Desert Storm and Operation Iraqi Freedom II, where he earned a Bronze Star. After relocating to South Alabama for work in 2013, he spent more than a decade in industrial safety roles before retiring from FMC Agriculture Solutions in 2024. Jones holds a B.S. in Liberal Arts with a focus on Administration and Management from Excelsior University. He currently serves as an Associate Minister in Daphne and holds leadership roles in Alabama Arise, the Baldwin County NAACP, SEEDS (a local education foundation), and the Episcopal Diocese’s racial-justice commission. He positions himself as a veteran-driven, community-grounded public servant.

Platform Priorities

Veterans’ support: Expand access to VA care, mental-health services, and transition programs.
Education investment: Strengthen public schools, support local foundations, improve funding for rural and suburban districts.
Worker safety & economic mobility: Draws on his industry background to push for safe workplaces, fair wages, and job opportunities in coastal Alabama.
Racial justice & equity: Advocates for equal access to opportunity, fair policing, and community-based justice initiatives.
Healthcare access: Supports lowering costs and expanding rural and suburban provider access.

Voter & Donor Support

Jones’s natural base includes veterans, Black voters, faith-based communities, and civic-engagement organizations connected to Alabama Arise and the NAACP. His network in Baldwin County’s nonprofit and church communities gives him early grassroots potential, but major-dollar donor support remains unclear.

Why He Might Win

Strong leadership credentials from military and community service.
Deep involvement in local civic and racial-justice organizations.
Could consolidate Democratic voters in Mobile and Baldwin County who want a community advocate rather than a traditional politician.

Why He Might Lose

AL-01 is a heavily Republican and structurally difficult district for Democrats.
Low name recognition outside political and advocacy circles.
Fundraising capacity and campaign infrastructure are still unknown.

Key Election Variables

Whether Democratic turnout in Mobile County improves.
Ability to attract moderate or independent voters in Baldwin County.
National environment and how energized Democratic voters are in a red-state cycle.
Strength of the Republican nominee (likely strong).

General: Low due to district partisanship, not candidate quality.
Primary: Uncontested

District 2 – Shomari Figures

Shomari Figures, 40, is the incumbent representative for Alabama’s 2nd Congressional District and one of the most prominent rising Democrats in the state. He comes from a well-known civil-rights and political family: his father filed the landmark lawsuit that bankrupted the Ku Klux Klan, and later served in the Alabama Senate until his passing. His mother succeeded him and continues to hold the seat today, giving Figures deep roots in both legal advocacy and state-level policymaking. First elected under the new court-ordered map that reshaped AL-02 into a majority-Black district, Figures now represents a constituency that aligns strongly with Democratic priorities and demographics.

Platform Priorities

Civil rights & justice reform: Continues his family’s legacy advocating for equal protection, voting rights, and community safety.
Economic development: Focus on job creation, small-business support, and federal investment in Montgomery and the Black Belt.
Healthcare access: Supports lowering costs and protecting coverage, especially in rural counties where hospital closures hit hardest.
Education: Pushes for stronger public-school investment and college/job-training opportunities.
Good governance & public integrity: Emphasizes transparency and ethical leadership.

Voter & Donor Support

Figures benefits from a built-in majority-Democratic district, strong support among Black voters, Montgomery urban voters, and younger progressives. His family’s name carries influence in civil-rights, church, community activism, and legal circles. Donor support is expected to remain steady, with national Democratic groups likely to protect the seat.

Why He Might Win

Incumbency advantage and strong district alignment.
Deep family legacy in justice advocacy and Democratic politics.
Represents a newly drawn district designed to empower minority voters.
National midterm trends in 2026 could disadvantage Republicans down-ballot.

Why He Might Lose

Realistically, he’s unlikely to face a serious threat.
Only vulnerabilities would come from intra-party disputes, low-turnout anomalies, or unexpected scandals; none currently present.

Key Election Variables

Turnout in Montgomery and the Black Belt.
Whether Republicans invest resources despite long odds.
Strength of Figures’s community presence and constituent services (currently strong).

Chances of Winning the General Election

Very High: one of the safest Democratic seats in Alabama.

District 3 – Lee McInnis

Lee McInnis, an older Alabama native and Auburn University graduate, is a U.S. Army veteran with an extensive background in defense intelligence. After completing a master’s degree in Communications and International Relations at Auburn, he worked in Washington in military intelligence and later deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan as a civilian analyst. His service earned him multiple honors, including two NATO medals, the Joint Staff Civil Commendation Medal, the Global War on Terrorism Civilian Service Medal, and the Defense Intelligence Agency Director’s Intelligence Award. McInnis has no prior political experience but has taught government at a local college.

Platform Priorities

Healthcare: Repeal sections of the Trump-era budget he argues cut $1 trillion from federal health-care support.
Education: Expand access and funding for public schools and higher education.
Middle-class stability: Advocates for policies that strengthen wages, affordability, and economic opportunity.

Voter & Donor Support

Likely to draw interest from veterans, Auburn-area moderates, and Democratic voters seeking a national-security–experienced candidate. Donor support is expected to be modest given the district’s strong Republican tilt.

Why He Might Win

Uncontested Democratic primary.
Strong national-security credentials and academic background.
Appeals to voters who value military and intelligence experience.

Why He Might Lose

AL-03 is a solid Republican district.
Limited name recognition and no prior elected service.
Fundraising obstacles typical for Democrats in deep-red regions.

Key Election Variables

Turnout in Auburn and surrounding counties.
Ability to raise funds and connect with younger voters.
Strength of incumbent Mike Rogers- currently strong last ran unopposed & 10+ years in Congress

Chances of Winning the General Election: Low- district is safely Republican despite a credible résumé.

District 4 – Amanda Pusczek & Shane Weaver

Amanda Pusczek, 35, is a nurse and progressive Democrat focused on strengthening public institutions and expanding opportunities for working families. A political newcomer, she centers her campaign on improving conditions for federal workers, supporting small businesses, and building a fair and humane immigration system. She also emphasizes the need for fully funded public schools and modernized learning environments.

Platform Priorities

Federal workers & small businesses: Policies that improve workplace protections and encourage small-business growth.

Immigration: A fair, humane, opportunity-focused system reflecting America’s immigrant heritage.

Education: Fully funded public schools and support for innovative, equitable education models.

Voter & Donor Support

Appeal strongest among progressive Democrats, younger voters, and healthcare workers. Donor support is expected to be limited in this heavily Republican district.

Why She Might Win

Clear, values-driven progressive agenda.
Authentic working-class background as a nurse.

Why She Might Lose
AL-04 is one of the most Republican districts in the state.
Very limited name recognition and fundraising power.
Progressive platform may struggle with conservative rural voters.

Key Election Variables
Turnout among progressive and younger Democrats.
Ability to run a shoestring grassroots campaign.
Strength of the Republican incumbent — 28 years in office, deeply entrenched.

District 4 – Shane Weaver

Shane Weaver, 52, is a lifelong Alabamian from a family of coal miners and farmers, bringing a deeply working-class perspective to the race. Raised in Nauvoo and a graduate of Carbon Hill High School, Weaver experienced firsthand the challenges of low-wage jobs before putting himself through the University of Alabama, where he earned a degree in Management Information Systems. He has since worked as a project manager across multiple industries. Weaver frames his life experience with poverty, long hours, and job insecurity as the foundation of his political philosophy: government should serve working people, not corporations and the wealthy.

Platform Priorities

Worker rights: Fair wages, stronger unions, and shifting economic power away from corporations.
Child safety: Safer schools, better protections, and ensuring children have consistent access to food and support.
Financial security: Policies to address rising prices, housing costs, and basic economic instability for working families.

Voter & Donor Support

Likely to appeal to working-class Democrats, union households, and voters drawn to economic-populist messaging. Donor support expected to be modest due to district partisanship.

Why He Might Win

Authentic working-class story with lived experience.
Populist workers-first platform could resonate with some Democratic voters.

Why He Might Lose

District is overwhelmingly Republican and historically noncompetitive.
Low name recognition and limited financial resources.
Economic-populist message faces an uphill climb against entrenched conservative voting patterns.

Key Election Variables

Ability to mobilize economically stressed voters.
Grassroots enthusiasm vs. limited funding.
Republican incumbent’s dominance — 28 years in office, deeply secure.

District 5 – Jeremy Devito, Candice Devieilh, Greg Howard, Andrew Sneed

Alabama’s 5th Congressional District, centered on the rapidly growing city of Huntsville, has attracted an unusually crowded Democratic primary field for 2026, with four declared candidates: Jeremy Devito, Candice Duvieilh, Greg Howard Jr., and Andrew Sneed. While the district remains a Republican stronghold, demographic shifts and first-term GOP incumbent Dale Strong’s relatively low profile have prompted Democrats to test the waters, hoping that national midterm trends and Huntsville’s urban growth might create a narrow opening.

Jeremy Devito, a mid-30s Army veteran and local activist, is running as an unapologetic progressive. He emphasizes democracy protection, civil rights, and climate action, and has been outspoken in his criticism of Trump-aligned politics. His platform energizes left-wing voters but his aggressive rhetoric, including a viral anti-ICE rant, may alienate moderates in a conservative-leaning district.
Candice Duvieilh, a public policy expert and former educator, brings a technocratic, issue-focused approach. With degrees in education and nonprofit management, she emphasizes school funding, healthcare access, and federal accountability. Duvieilh has earned praise for her credibility and professionalism, but her campaign remains low-profile and underfunded, limiting reach beyond policy circles.
Greg Howard Jr., a Huntsville-based author and LGBTQ media entrepreneur, brings a bold, progressive vision. A former drag performer and podcast host, Howard’s platform includes LGBTQ rights, marijuana legalization, police reform, and abolishing ICE. He is a strong communicator with appeal to younger and activist voters, but lacks political experience or major fundraising capacity.
Andrew Sneed, a 45-year-old small business owner and master plumber, is the early frontrunner. A Huntsville native who built his company from scratch, Sneed presents as a center-left, electable alternative. His messaging centers on protecting Social Security, government reform, and job security in the face of automation. With over $230K raised, far more than his rivals, and a focus on pragmatic solutions, Sneed is seen as the Democrat best positioned to compete in a general election.

Primary Outlook:
Sneed leads in fundraising and viability, but Devito and Howard may split progressive votes, while Duvieilh appeals to moderates seeking experience. The field reflects a growing ambition among Democrats to field credible candidates even in red districts, and to build name recognition for the long haul.

Flip Potential:
Realistically, AL-05 remains a steep climb. The GOP has held the seat for decades, and Dale Strong won with over 65% in 2022. However, Huntsville’s rapid growth, a shifting workforce, and potential Republican midterm fatigue may allow Democrats to tighten the margin. If any seat outside AL-02 is flippable, this is it, but it would take near-perfect conditions and a strong nominee to pull it off.

District 6 – Keith Pilkington

Pilkington, a middle-aged Army veteran and registered nurse, is the only declared Democratic candidate in Alabama’s 6th Congressional District for 2026. He has framed his campaign around economic fairness, declaring “war on high costs”and calling for a future “we all can afford.” Beyond that messaging, however, little public information exists. There is no official campaign website, public policy platform, or visible organizing presence.

Platform Priorities

Cost of living: Reduce financial strain on working families and improve economic access.
Veterans & healthcare: Background suggests likely concern for veterans’ issues and medical care, though specifics are unknown.
General economic reform: Broad messaging about affordability and economic fairness.

Voter & Donor Support
Minimal public footprint; no evidence of donor network, endorsements, or active grassroots support. Unclear whether the campaign is ongoing or dormant.

Why He Might Win

Military and healthcare background could appeal to select voters if effectively communicated.
Uncontested in the Democratic primary as of now.

Why He Will Likely Lose

No online presence, press coverage, or concrete campaign activity.
Lacks clear messaging, infrastructure, or visibility.
District 6 is a deep Republican stronghold.

District 7- Terri Sewell

Terri Sewell, 60, is a multi-term Democratic incumbent and the clear favorite to retain her seat in Alabama’s 7th Congressional District. A Selma native and proud African American leader, Sewell has long represented the state’s only majority-Black district. She boasts deep personal and historical ties to the area: her mother was a librarian, her father a beloved local coach, and she was the first Black valedictorian of Selma High School. Sewell later graduated with honors from Princeton, earned a master’s at Oxford, and completed her law degree at Harvard. She began her legal career in New York before returning to Alabama, becoming the first Black woman partner at a Birmingham law firm.

Platform Priorities

Job creation & economic development: Focused on workforce expansion and support for small businesses.
Healthcare: Supports expanding access and affordability, particularly in underserved areas.
Veterans: Advocates for stronger VA support and transitional services.
Education: Invests in public school funding and college access.
Infrastructure & preservation: Prioritizes rebuilding roads and broadband while defending civil rights landmarks and history in the district.

Voter & Donor Support
Sewell has longstanding, deep support from Black voters, community leaders, and national Democratic donors. She is consistently one of Alabama’s strongest fundraisers and has national visibility through her work on voting rights and historic preservation.

Why She Might Win

Highly popular and well-established.
Represents a safe Democratic stronghold.
Deep roots and unmatched resume in the district.

Why She Might Lose

No realistic path to defeat based on current electoral dynamics.

Key Election Variables

Turnout in the Black Belt and urban centers like Birmingham and Tuscaloosa.
No serious Democratic primary challengers or Republican threats expected.

Overall, Alabama is poised for significant turnover in its congressional delegation, though none of the seats are currently expected to flip from red to blue. Still, if Trump’s unpopularity drags on down-ballot Republicans, there’s a narrow path forward for a few of the more credible Democratic challengers, especially in rapidly shifting districts like AL-05.

Engagement Resources:

Ballotpedia- serves as an initial go to for candidates & races at all level: https://ballotpedia.org/Alabama_elections,_2026
Dakarai Larriett Arrest Footage- https://www.usatoday.com/videos/news/2024/10/30/bodycam-video-sober-man-gets-arrested-for-alleged-drunken-driving/75946312007/
Kyle Sweetsner- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3QVmx5vdbM
Andrew Sneed Interview- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNRmBtT5LZw
Terri Sewell Interview- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XyvK7yXlds
Lee McInnis TownHall- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOZlOyXKfuo

Deconstructing “Peace”: Trump’s Settled Conflicts and the Ceasefire Illusion (Foreign Policy Brief #222)

Foreign Policy Brief #222 | Inijah Quadri | November 22, 2025

Policy Issue Summary

This distinction is central to evaluating the foreign policy legacy of President Donald Trump, who has built a brand on being a “dealmaker” who “settles” intractable conflicts. These claims demand rigorous scrutiny, particularly as they are applied to new and ongoing wars. An examination of the key conflicts he cites—from the Middle East and Afghanistan to his current overtures on Ukraine—reveals a consistent pattern of conflating temporary de-escalations, transactional realignments, or a victor’s imposition with the arduous, multi-generational work of genuine peace. The core policy issue is whether these interventions are substantive resolutions or dangerous illusions that entrench the very power imbalances that fuel conflict.

Analysis

A critical analysis of these “settled” wars shows that none have resulted in a genuine peace settlement, and the model itself is deeply flawed. The 2020 Doha Agreement with the Talibanin Afghanistan is a primary exhibit. This was never a peace treaty for the Afghan people; it was a withdrawal agreement for the United States. The accord explicitly bypassed the sitting Afghan government, and as of late 2025, the war has not ended. It has merely transformed. The nation is gripped by a humanitarian and economic catastrophe, women’s and girls’ rights have been severely curtailed (including bans on secondary and university education, sweeping restrictions on most employment, and limits on movement without a male guardian—with only narrow exceptions), and the country faces renewed armed conflict from groups like ISIS-Khorasan. This is not peace; it is abandonment.

The celebrated Abraham Accords followed the same transactional logic. These accords were a significant diplomatic realignment, announcing normalization with four Arab states (the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan), though Sudan’s agreement was never ratified and full ties weren’t established. However, this was a deal built on avoiding the central conflict: the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories. By bypassing the question of Palestinian self-determination, the accords did not “settle” the Middle East. The catastrophic Gaza war of 2023-2025 and the new, fragile “Gaza accord” of October 2025 are testaments to this failure. The new accord is a ceasefire, not a settlement. It has halted the most intense bombing, but it does not address the occupation, the blockade, or the right of return. It has merely put a lid on a boiling pot.

Similarly, the diplomatic overtures with North Korea were pure spectacle. The summits produced photo-ops but no tangible denuclearization. Today, in late 2025, North Korea is more brazen than ever, testing advanced solid-fuel ICBMs and hypersonic missiles, and has declared its nuclear status “irreversible.” The “peace” was purely rhetorical. The same is true in the Balkans, where a “Serbia-Kosovo” economic deal did nothing to resolve the core sovereignty dispute, which continues to flare up with Serbian-backed hybrid warfare and requires a NATO peacekeeping presence.

Likewise, the Thailand-Cambodia border dispute remains unsettled. Although large-scale military clashes over the Preah Vihear Temple (Khao Phra Wihan) have subsided since the major confrontations in 2008 and 2011, the core sovereignty issue has never been fully settled. Despite President Trump’s declaration of peace following his involvement in an October 2025 accord, tensions have since reignited, with both nations increasing their military presence in contested areas. This situation underscores the critical difference between a temporary ceasefire and a durable political resolution.

Now, the elephant in the room: the Russia-Ukraine war. President Trump, who recently admitted his campaign-trail “24 hours” settlement claim was “a little bit sarcastic,” is now actively attempting to broker a deal. This situation provides the clearest possible illustration of the ceasefire-versus-peace-settlement-fallacy. The administration’s plan, as reported, is not a peace settlement. It is an attempt to force a ceasefire by pressuring Ukraine to halt its fightand, according to multiple sources, to surrender its claim to the Donbas and Crimea. This is not diplomacy; it is the imposition of a victor’s terms on the victim. A “peace” that rewards Russian imperial aggression by allowing it to keep the territory it conquered through war and occupation is not a settlement. It is a violation of international law and a betrayal of Ukrainian sovereignty. It would be a temporary, amoral truce that guarantees future conflict by validating the principle that might makes right.

Policymakers must critically distinguish between a temporary ceasefire and a genuine peace settlement. The analysis shows that branding transactional withdrawals (Afghanistan) or diplomatic realignments (Abraham Accords) as “peace” creates a dangerous illusion. These approaches do not resolve underlying conflicts; they bypass core grievances, abandon allies, or entrench power imbalances, leading to predictable future crises (e.g., the 2023-2025 Gaza war).

Engagement Resources

Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP) (https://ucdp.uu.se/): A leading academic resource for data on organized violence and armed conflicts. It provides the empirical data necessary to distinguish between active wars, ceasefires, and genuine peace.
Crisis Group (https://www.crisisgroup.org/): An independent organization providing in-depth field research, analysis, and recommendations on current and emerging conflicts. Its reports are essential for understanding the complexities on the ground, beyond official government narratives.
Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) (https://ips-dc.org/): A progressive research and advocacy center that critiques US foreign policy and militarism. It offers analysis that connects foreign interventions with domestic priorities and advocates for non-militarist solutions.
Foundation for Middle East Peace (FMEP) (https://fmep.org/): A nonprofit organization dedicated to promoting a just resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It provides resources, analysis, and grant-making that center international law and human rights.
Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) Global Conflict Tracker (https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-tracker): A comprehensive, interactive guide that monitors the status of dozens of ongoing conflicts worldwide, clarifying their background, current intensity, and prospects for resolution.

The State of Sports Betting Policy in the United States (Social Justice Policy Brief #184)

Social Justice Policy Brief #184 | Katie Lever | November 13, 2025

The Issues

The legal landscape of sports betting has been tumultuous for years now. Last February, for instance, Ohio banned prop bets on college sports and federal legislation to limit sports betting advertising has been introduced. Going further back, the 2017 Murphy v. NCAA Supreme Court ruling reversed the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, which was passed in 1992 and prohibited sports gambling in most states, allowing for such a legal landscape today. Justice Samuel Alito authored the opinion and argued that the PASPA violated the 10th amendment which protects the power of the states. As of 2025, 38 states and the District of Columbia have legalized sports betting to some extent, whether through in-person or virtual avenues.

Legalizing sports betting has always had its fair share of pros and cons. Critics point out that one of the cons of a legal sports betting industry is that it offers legitimacy to an industry that is to some extent, dependent on addiction. It’s also hard to ignore the monetary pull of sports gambling, as ESPN reported earlier this year that sports betting brought in $13.7 billion dollars in revenue. The digital nature of sports betting also creates what is called “frictionless gambling,” which is gambling that exists without traditional barriers like entry fees, that streamline the gambling process and make it easier and more accessible, especially for minors. Experts also note that, while alcohol or cigarettes are known to be addictive, similar initiatives highlighting the addictiveness of gambling do not exist on the same scale, leaving consumers less aware of their potential to develop a gambling addiction than, say, alcoholism.

Analysis

Some argue that legalizing sports betting has also put athletes at increased risk of addiction and harassment. Because college athletes are easier to physically locate and digitally access than the pros, safety issues like stalking, harassment, threats, and abuse from irate gamblers arise. This concern is bolstered by the NCAA’s data. A recent report shows that 12% of online abuse aimed at college athletes come from sports bettors. These numbers spike during peak athletic seasons like March Madness, when women basketball athletes are three times more likely than men to be victims of gambling-related abuse online than male basketball players. Add to these critiques a history of point shaving and match fixing, dating back to the 1919 World Series tainted by the infamous “Black Sox scandal,” and sports betting has faced significant pushback for decades. Such history has critics wondering if the current state of sports betting is eroding the integrity of fair competition in sports.

However, supporters of legalization and regulation of sports betting argue that, legalized or not, sports betting is a hugely popular vice that needs legal guardrails for consumer protection. Like any other legal vice, regulation of sports betting is key to consumer safety. Without a regulated industry, dedicated gamblers will find unregulated markets abroad and face further stigma should they fall into addiction. Legal, regulated gambling markets ensure gamblers see helpful messaging and addiction resources, while unregulated markets leave them with all the risks and no support.

Regardless, it is clear after the Murphy v. NCAA ruling that sports betting in the United States is here to stay. And a more digital gambling landscape necessitates policies that put consumer safety first, expand education on addiction, and guarantee real support for those at risk or already affected.

Federal Court Blocks Texas’ Racially Discriminatory Redistricting Map (Social Justice Policy Brief #184)

Social Justice Policy Brief #184 | Valerie Henderson | November 22, 2025

Summary

Analysis

The federal court’s finding of unlawful racial gerrymandering exposes a cynical attempt by the Texas Legislature to subordinate democratic representation to racial targets in order to cement partisan control.

Race as the Predominant Factor

The court ruled that race, not merely partisanship, was the predominant factor in how the new 2025 Texas map was drawn. This finding was supported by evidence showing the legislature used precise racial targets (often drawing districts with “on-the-nose” bare majorities just over 50%) and dismantled several existing minority-majority “coalition districts”. Senator Hinojosa underscored this critique, arguing the redrawn districts were all districts represented by Black and Hispanic members of Congress. He directly accused the effort—which was precipitated by a controversial U.S. Department of Justice letter misrepresenting a prior Fifth Circuit ruling—of being “targeted racial discrimination” designed to “wipe out four congressional districts” elected by minority-majority voters.

Undermining Democracy and the Appeal

This injunction is a crucial win for Black and Hispanic voters, reaffirming constitutional protections against unlawful maneuvering that harms the voices of communities of color. The majority opinion, written by U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown, rejected the argument that the case was “just politics,” emphasizing the constitutional mandate against racial discrimination in districting.

The case’s ultimate fate rests with the Supreme Court, which is already set to rule on a similar racial gerrymandering challenge in Louisiana v. Callais. Depending on that ruling, the Texas map—and the underlying legal precedent—could be either swiftly reinstated or permanently struck down. However, for the 2026 election cycle, the court’s action immediately preserves the existing representation of minority communities and halts a clear political power grab.

My Opinion

This ruling is a powerful affirmation that in Texas, voters choose representatives; representatives do not choose their voters. The 2025 mid-decade redistricting effort was a shameful and cynical attempt to dilute the political strength of Texas’s growing Black, Hispanic, and Asian populations.

The legislature’s defense—that they were simply responding to federal guidance—is rendered hollow by the court’s finding that they deliberately prioritized racial targets over all other traditional criteria. This was an act of political self-preservation, weaponizing the census data and judicial complexity to entrench one party’s power at the expense of democracy.

The immediate blocking of the map is a social justice imperative. It ensures that the 14th and 15th Amendments remain the guardians of equal representation, preventing the Texas Legislature from making a mockery of the principle of “one person, one vote” through calculated, discriminatory line-drawing.

Engagement Resources

Campaign Legal Center (CLC): A non-partisan organization involved in fighting partisan and racial gerrymandering cases across the U.S., including Texas.
Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF): Key legal group representing Hispanic plaintiffs in voting rights and redistricting litigation in Texas.
Texas Legislative Council (TLC) Redistricting Page: The official source for all map drafts, census data used, and the legislative history of the 2025 map.

Broad, Dramatic Changes Threaten the Environment as Trump Lifts Protections (Environment Policy Brief #184)

Environment Policy Brief #184 | Charlie Sweeney | November 24, 2025

For those keeping score at home, Trump’s disregard for climate control and environmental protections goes back to his first administration. But this week has been described by some activists as “the week from hell,” as the administration moved to end automatic protections for newly listed
threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. Conservationists warn that weakening these protections could accelerate population declines and push vulnerable species toward possible extinction.

At the same time, the administration is reviving and expanding plans to open huge stretches of public land in the Arctic and the Western U.S. for oil and gas drilling. These landscapes are some of the last truly intact ecosystems on Earth, home to carbon-rich soils, rare species, and deep Indigenous heritage. The Center for Biological Diversity has warned that drilling in these regions would “cause irreparable damage to one of the world’s most important wild places and its wildlife,” a stark reminder of how quickly these ecosystems could be lost.

Climate policy is being dismantled just as aggressively. On ‘day one’ of Trump’s second term, the administration’s “Unleashing American Energy” order signaled a full embrace of fossil fuels, directing agencies to reconsider whether greenhouse gases are dangerous—a foundational scientific finding behind every major U.S. climate rule. Coal-mining safety rules and air-toxics standards for power plants are being rolled back too, even as black lung, asthma, and air-quality concerns rise.

And now the court battles are beginning. Environmental groups, and several states, have filed lawsuits challenging these rollbacks and the broader effort to shield fossil fuel companies from accountability.
For example, Ii Hawaiʻi’s pending climate deception lawsuit against Big Oil, Attorney General Anne Lopez stated that companies have “put profits ahead of people,” a sentiment that mirrors the broader fear that business interests are being elevated over environmental science in Washington.

Taken together, these actions form a clear and troubling pattern: extraction over preservation, deregulation over public health, short-term profit over long-term survival.

Nature is resilient, but it has limits. The return of dolphins and whales to New York waters happened because decades of regulation and cleanup made it possible. The booming oyster populations are the result of sustained pollution controls. Cleaner waters, returning wildlife, healthier ecosystems—these are achievements that can only be sustained through robust protections.

The stakes are high as the planet’s biological clock ticks, and without legal protections, this administration’s policy and regulation changes could have effects lasting for generations.

Engagement Resources

“Dolphins Return to New York City Waters” — The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/02/nyregion/dolphins-nyc-hudson-river.html
“Oyster Restoration Shows Promise in New York Harbor” — EcoWatch: https://www.ecowatch.com/new-york-harbor-oysters-restoration.html
“Trump Administration Seeks to Roll Back Protections for Imperiled Species” — Associated Press: https://apnews.com/article/endangered-species-act-trump-regulations-bf92e52c78f345a2853a64ad6e12e1db
“Lawsuit Aims to Block Drilling in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge” — Center for Biological Diversity: https://biologicaldiversity.org/w/news/press-releases/lawsuit-aims-block-drilling-arctic-national-wildlife-refuge-2020-08-24/
“Trump Signs Order to Boost Fossil Fuels and Review Climate Rules” — The Verge: https://www.theverge.com/2025/1/20/trump-fossil-fuel-executive-order-climate-regulations
“Hawaii Supreme Court Upholds Climate Lawsuit Against Big Oil” — Hawaii Attorney General: https://ag.hawaii.gov/news-release/hawaii-supreme-court-upholds-climate-lawsuit-against-big-oil/

Reclaiming the Pedestal: Monument Removal and the Struggle for Public Memory (Social Justice Policy Brief #183)

Social Justice Policy Brief #183 | Inijah Quadri | November 14, 2025

Policy Issue Summary

The ongoing, contentious debate over public monuments is not a referendum on history, but a profound struggle over power, memory, and the definition of public space. For generations, city squares, parks, and government buildings have been dominated by statues celebrating figures of colonialism, slavery, and state violence—from Confederate generals and slave traders to architects of Indigenous genocide. These monuments have never been neutral historical markers. They are active political statements, erected to assert a specific, dominant narrative of power and to legitimize a social hierarchy built on white supremacy.

The mass protests for racial justice in 2020, following the murder of George Floyd, catalyzed a global reckoning. This movement, led by Black Lives Matter activists and Indigenous groups, brought new urgency to what community organizers had demanded for decades. Consequently, dozens of monuments honoring figures like Robert E. Lee, Christopher Columbus, and others were toppled, relocated, or officially removed. This represented a significant shift in public consciousness, a grassroots rejection of publicly funded symbols of oppression.

However, this progress is now facing a powerful and organized counter-offensive. The fourth edition of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s “Whose Heritage?” report, released in April 2025, notes a slowdown in removals. This is coupled with a reactionary political movement. A March 2025 executive order, “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History,” actively seeks to halt removals and even restore toppled statues, such as the bronze of Confederate General Albert Pike. This, along with state-level laws designed to “protect” these monuments, has re-established the central conflict: public space is a battlefield, and these statues are symbols of an ideology that refuses to release its grip.

Analysis

The most common argument against monument removal is the claim that it is “erasing history.” This is a deliberate fallacy. Removing a statue does not erase history; it ceases the public veneration of a historical figure. History is not learned from bronze statues. It is preserved in books, archives, museums, and classrooms. The “history” that is truly being erased by these statues is the history of those they oppressed. A statue of a Confederate general, for example, tells one story—a false one of “heritage” and the “Lost Cause”—while actively silencing the history of the millions of enslaved people he fought to keep in bondage.

The majority of Confederate monuments were not built in the immediate aftermath of the Civil War as gestures of grief. They were erected decades later, during the height of the Jim Crow era, as a coordinated propaganda campaign. Their purpose was to terrorize Black communities and unmistakably assert the persistence of white supremacy, even in the face of legal defeat. These monuments are not history; they are artifacts of historical intimidation. To maintain them in places of honor is to co-sign that intimidation and to force Black citizens to navigate a public landscape that celebrates their ancestors’ enslavers.

This struggle is not isolated to the United States. It is a central component of a global decolonization movement. From the “Rhodes Must Fall” campaign in South Africa to the toppling of slaver Edward Colston’s statue in Bristol, England, communities across the world are demanding a re-evaluation of their commemorative landscapes. They are asking a fundamental question: who is worthy of our honor, and who has the power to decide? This process is not about destruction; it is about creation. It is about making space for new monuments that tell a fuller, more honest, and more just story—monuments to resistance, to liberation, and to the victims of the very figures currently cast in bronze. This is not an erasure of history, but a profound and necessary engagement with it, demanding a public memory that reflects collective liberation rather than selective oppression.

Engagement Resources

Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) – Whose Heritage?(https://www.splcenter.org/whose-heritage) A comprehensive project that tracks public symbols of the Confederacy across the United States. It provides an interactive map, data, and reports on the history of the “Lost Cause” narrative and the status of removal campaigns.
Monument Lab (https://monumentlab.com/) A public art and history studio that works to advance justice and equity by reimagining the future of monuments. Through participatory research, such as the National Monument Audit, and artistic commissions, it helps communities rethink public symbols and create new, inclusive forms of remembrance.
Equal Justice Initiative (EJI) – Community Remembrance Project(https://eji.org/projects/community-remembrance-project/) This project works with communities to document the history of racial terror, memorialize its victims, and erect historical markers. It is a powerful example of creating new, truthful memorials as a corrective to the false narratives of Confederate monuments.

The Potential Harm Posed to Society Due to the Inaccuracies of AI (Technology Policy Brief #159)

Technology Policy Brief #159 | Naja Barnes | November 20th, 2025

Analysis

Inaccuracies within the data quality of AI systems can create threatening situations that then lead to harmful outcomes. At Kenwood High School in Baltimore County, Maryland, Taki Allen, a high school student, was handcuffed and had a firearm pointed at him. The incident occurred because the school’s AI-powered security system mistook the teen’s Doritos bag for a possible firearm. The school’s district security department canceled the gun detection alert, but the principal was unaware that the alert was canceled when she reported the incident. This harmful mistake could have possibly physically harmed the teen, and very clearly highlights the limitations of AI’s capabilities. It was able to incorrectly check for a threat quickly, but was unable to correctly identify that there was a threat in the first place. It was the action of humans that corrected the mistake created by the AI-powered security system.

Self-driving cars, powered by AI systems, have also caused harm and even casualties. In 2018, Elaine Herzberg was struck and killed by a self-driving car as she walked her bicycle across the street. There was a backup driver (Rafaela Vasquez) in the car, but he was visibly distracted and had no hands on the wheel at the time of the accident. Most backup drivers are instructed to keep their hands on the wheel to take control of the car quickly in emergencies. However, the self-driving car failed to detect the woman in the street, highlighting the limitations of AI systems. This instance demonstrated AI’s limitations in reacting to unpredictable situations. This is another example of an AI-powered system creating a potentially harmful situation that a human could have fixed.

Conclusion

AI systems enable our society to operate more efficiently, but there is no denying the potential harm they pose due to issues with data quality and limited capabilities. Human intervention is sometimes necessary in instances involving AI-powered products.

Engagement Resources

What is the history of artificial intelligence (AI)? https://www.tableau.com/data-insights/ai/history
Student handcuffed after Doritos bag mistaken for a gun by school’s AI security system https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/25/us/baltimore-student-chips-ai-gun-detection-hnk
When AI Gets It Wrong: Addressing AI Hallucinations and Bias https://mitsloanedtech.mit.edu/ai/basics/addressing-ai-hallucinations-and-bias/
How a Self-Driving Uber Killed a Pedestrian in Arizona https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/20/us/self-driving-uber-pedestrian-killed.html

Keywords: AI, Harm, Impact, Threat, System

Antisemitism Is the Weapon, Teachers are the Target (Education Policy Brief #213)

Education Policy Brief #213 | Mindy Spatt | November 10, 2025

Summary

Analysis

The House Committee on Education and Workforce recently opened an investigation into whether the National Education Association (NEA) is “contributing to antisemitism among its members and in classrooms across the United States.” The investigation is in response to allegations of anti-Semitism against the nation’s largest teachers’ union, the National Education Association (NEA).

The NEA’s Representative Assembly had initially rejected a set of holocaust education materials promoted by the pro-Israel Anti-Discrimination League, due to a determination that the materials were biased. Although the NEA leadership overturned the initial determination after public pressure, lawmakers have expressed concern about an NEA handbook that says the group will “educate members about the difference between anti-Zionism and antisemitism” and promote “free speech in defense of Palestine at K-12 schools, colleges, and universities. Investigators are demanding that the union give them all communications, documents, or meeting minutes that include the words “antisemitism,” “Israel,” “Israeli,” “Palestine,” or “Palestinian,” since Oct. 7, 2023.

Committee chairman Tim Walberg (R., Mich.) said in a statement that the committee is weighing “legislation to specifically address antisemitic discrimination within labor unions and to combat antisemitism in federally funded schools.” He referenced another teachers’ union that has come under fire over its “anti-Israel” agenda. After the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) launched a fundraising campaign for ANERA, a 50-year-old Gaza humanitarian aid organization registered as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, it was accused of “working with Hamas” by the radical Zionist North American Values Institute, whose mission is to “mitigate and eventually overcome the impacts of extreme social justice ideology in their children’s classroom.”

Dr. Maura Finkelstein, a Jewish tenured associate professor and chair of the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at Muhlenberg College in Pennsylvania lost her job after a January 2024 social media repost related to Zionism. The American Association of University Professors investigated her firing concluded that the College, in “dismissing Professor Finkelstein from the faculty solely because of one anti-Zionist repost on Instagram, acted in violation of AAUP-supported principles and standards of academic freedom and due process.” In addition, “the administration’s hasty action, facilitated by the monitoring and dissemination of Finkelstein’s social media posts by administrators, has severely impaired the climate for academic freedom at Muhlenberg College.”

In Massachusetts, a legislatively mandated Special Commission on Combating Antisemitism approved a controversial set of educational and training recommendations related to the Holocaust and antisemitism. The recommendations reference the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (ILHRA) definition of antisemitism, which advocates have long argued conflates criticism of Israel with antisemitism. In a public response, educators from Concerned Jewish Faculty and Staff and Together criticized the recommendations as ineffective and warned they could undermine safe learning environments for both students and teachers.

In California, a fierce battle erupted over AB 715, a bill sponsored by the Jewish Legislative Caucus ostensibly to address rising antisemitism in schools. A large statewide coalition organized to oppose the bill, which, in its original version, tied all Jewish students to Israel and elevated accusations of antisemitism for treatment different from other types of bias.

The California Coalition to Defend Public Education (CCDPE) organized a broad statewide coalition including teachers’ organizations, parents’ groups, civil rights groups, religious congregations, racial justice organizations, and supporters of ethnic studies to lobby hard against the bill and raise awareness of its unequal treatment of students and censoring of teachers. The powerful California Teachers Association eventually opposed the bill, delaying its progress, and the Northern California American Civil Liberties Union also rejected AB715 as infringing on free speech.

They weren’t able to stop the bill, but did get some of the worst provisions amended. Still, the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) is seeking to have it overturned in federal court on First Amendment grounds. Plaintiffs include teachers and families who want accurate instruction and robust debate about modern Middle East history, including Palestinian perspectives. Their complaint alleges SB 715 recommends teaching standards that “repeatedly conflate criticism of the State of Israel and of Zionism with antisemitism—for example, by deeming it ‘antisemitic’ to question Jewish people’s right to a majority state in a region inhabited by an equal number of Palestinians.”

In its Statement on Legislation Restricting Teaching about Race the AAUP comes out strongly against these types of statutory limits on educational content, saying “When politicians mandate the academic content that faculty can and cannot teach or the scholarly areas they can or cannot research or study, they prevent colleges and universities from fulfilling their missions. Such restrictions …portray robust academic inquiry and teaching as dangerous, deny students the opportunity to learn, and undercut the purpose of higher education. We therefore urge the defeat of these legislative initiatives and others of their kind to protect the academic freedom that is vital to the preservation of democracy.”

Engagement Resources

Legislative Threats to Academic Freedom: Redefinitions of Antisemitism and Racism, American Association of University Professors, March 2022, https://www.aaup.org/reports-publications/aaup-policies-reports/policy-statements/legislative-threats-academic-freedom
Academic Freedom and Tenure: Muhlenberg College, American Association of University Professors, April, 2025, https://www.aaup.org/reports-publications/aaup-policies-reports/investigation-and-inquiries/academic-freedom-and-tenure
California Democrats Are Fighting Trump’s Battle for Him, Lily Greenberg Call, Aug. 15, 2025, https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/15/opinion/california-democrat-jewish-trump.html
ADC Files Federal Suit Challenging California’s AB 715 for Chilling Classroom Speech, American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, Nov. 3, 2025, https://adc.org/adc-files-federal-suit-challenging-californias-ab-715-for-chilling-classroom-speech/

The Week That Was: Global News in Review Week (Foreign Policy Brief #221)

Foreign Policy Brief #221 | Abran C. | October 6-November 3

By Abran C.

US military buildup near Venezuela’s coast

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/17/us/politics/trump-caribbean-venezuela-us-military-maps.html

Since early September, the United States has carried out at least 14 strikes against alleged drug smuggling boats in the Caribbean and Pacific. The US has now deployed fighter jets, warships and thousands of troops to the Caribbean. The military buildup in the region is the largest since 1994 when the United States sent two aircraft carriers and more than 20,000 troops into Haiti to take part in “Operation Uphold Democracy.”

The presumed goal of US action in the Caribbean is regime change in Venezuela and the interest in removing the current regime from power likely stems from Venezuela’s strategic importance due to its natural resource wealth. It is worth noting that the Venezuela winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, Maria Cornia Machado, called on President Trump to stop Maduro’s war on her country.

President Donald Trump recently stated that Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro’s days in power were numbered, seemingly following on statements previously made where he and other officials announced the high likelihood of an expansion in strikes taking place against drug and military related targets within the country. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, recently stated that there was a likelihood of the US conducting military operations against both Venezuela and Colombia.

Meanwhile, Colombian President Gustavo Petro has said his country would not lend its territory or troops to aid US intervention in Venezuela. In response to the US military buildup Nicolas Maduro has ordered the Venezuelan armed forces, police and militia to deploy across 284 battlefronts across the country. Additionally 4.5 million members of Venezuela’s National Bolivarian Militia, an auxiliary force created in 2005 and made up of civilian volunteers and reservists, have reportedly mobilized to combat any incursion into the country.

War crimes in Sudan

UNFPA Women who fled the fighting in El Fasher wait for services at a UNFPA clinic in Tawila, Sudan.

Sudan’s ongoing three year brutal civil war last week witnessed a horrific phase of the war as paramilitary Rapid Support Forces took over the city of El Fasher in western Darfur. El Fasher was the last holdout in Darfur of the Sudanese Armed Forces. During the RSF’s invasion of the city, the group began a campaign of mass killing against civilians.In one instance condemned by the UN and international humanitarian groups who accuse the RSF of entering a hospital in El Fasher’s and killing everyone inside leaving at least 450 people dead. Experts estimate tens of thousands have been killed in the past week. More than 150,000 people have died since the conflict began, and about 12 million people have fled their homes in what the United Nations has called the world’s largest humanitarian crisis. In recent days the RSF has agreed to a proposal from the United States and Arab powers for a humanitarian ceasefire to allow in aid and is reportedly open to talks on a full cessation of hostilities. However it is worth noting that both the RSF and the Sudanese army have agreed to various ceasefire proposals during their nearly three year-long war, and none have held firm. The Trump administration has said it is putting efforts toward ending fighting in Sudan.

Hurricane Melissa hits the Caribbean

A man rests on a bicycle near destroyed houses in Black River, Jamaica, on Thursday [Matias Delacroix/AP Photo

Six million people in the Caribbean have been impacted by the recent deadly path of Hurricane Melissa according to the United Nations (UN).Multiple island nations including Haiti, Dominican Republic, Jamaica, and Cuba all suffered extensive damage and loss of life as a result of the monstrous storm. Hurricane Melissa made its deadly path with winds of up to 185 mph, with extreme rains and overwhelming storm surge causing widespread damage and panic across the Caribbean. The death toll in the wake of Hurricane Melissa’s path through the Caribbean stands at 75 and may rise as countries continue to assess the damage done. The majority of deaths have come from Haiti, with Jamaica, The Dominican Republic and Cuba following.

In the worst hit states, more than 43 deaths have been recorded and 16,000 people displaced in Haiti. In Jamaica 32 deaths have been counted and 60% of the island remains without power. Cuba suffered only a single loss of life but the hurricane caused widespread flooding, power outages, and damage to infrastructure. The US has announced it would be providing $24 million worth of aid to the affected countries. This funding will be used to provide shelter, water, sanitation, hygiene, food assistance, and emergency healthcare. Hurricane Melissa broke several records on its destructive path and became the most intense recorded storm to make landfall in the Atlantic this late in the season. Unusually warm ocean temperatures fueled the storm and similar warming ocean and atmospheric conditions make intense storms like Melissa more likely in the future.

Ukraine receives more patriot missiles

Police investigators inspect debris at a site of a dormitory building heavily damaged during an overnight Russian missile and drone strikes, amid Russia’s attack on Ukraine, in Zaporizhzhia, Ukraine, on Oct. 30, 2025. Photo by Stringer/ Reuters

Ukraine has recently received more US-made Patriot air defence systems from Germany to help it counter Russia’s daily missile barrages. However, President Donald Trump has ruled out sending Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine for now despite repeated requests from Kyiv for the long-range cruise missiles to strike at Russian targets across the border. The Russian army made territorial gains in Ukraine in October as it focused attacks on the eastern Donetsk region. Russia is reported to have taken 286 sq miles from Ukraine in just the last month. Additionally it has stepped up attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, as it has done in previous winters since beginning the war. In early October Russia unleashed its largest-ever attack on Ukraine’s natural gas sector and sent a missile barrage that knocked power outacross a large swath of Kyiv and created blackouts in nine regions nationwide.

« Older Entries

Latest Jobs Posts

Alaska (2026 Democratic Primary Preview Series Brief #2)

Alabama (2026 Democratic Primary Preview Series Brief #1)

Deconstructing “Peace”: Trump’s Settled Conflicts and the Ceasefire Illusion (Foreign Policy Brief #222)

Broad, Dramatic Changes Threaten the Environment as Trump Lifts Protections (Environment Policy Brief #184)

The Potential Harm Posed to Society Due to the Inaccuracies of AI (Technology Policy Brief #159)

Antisemitism Is the Weapon, Teachers are the Target (Education Policy Brief #213)

Alaska (2026 Democratic Primary Preview Series Brief #2)

Announced Alaska House Candidates

Announced Senate Candidates

Anna Diener

Mary Peltola

Announced Alaska House Candidates

Matt Schultz

Mary Petola

Alabama (2026 Democratic Primary Preview Series Brief #1)

Senate Candidates

House Candidates

District 1 – Clyde Jones

District 2 – Shomari Figures

District 3 – Lee McInnis

District 4 – Amanda Pusczek & Shane Weaver

District 4 – Shane Weaver

District 5 – Jeremy Devito, Candice Devieilh, Greg Howard, Andrew Sneed

District 6 – Keith Pilkington

District 7- Terri Sewell

Deconstructing “Peace”: Trump’s Settled Conflicts and the Ceasefire Illusion (Foreign Policy Brief #222)

Broad, Dramatic Changes Threaten the Environment as Trump Lifts Protections (Environment Policy Brief #184)

The Potential Harm Posed to Society Due to the Inaccuracies of AI (Technology Policy Brief #159)

Antisemitism Is the Weapon, Teachers are the Target (Education Policy Brief #213)

The Week That Was: Global News in Review Week (Foreign Policy Brief #221)

Make a Donation

Follow Us

Join Our Newsletter

Pin It on Pinterest