JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
West Virginia School District Sued For Forcing Students To Attend Religious Assembly During School Hours
Brief #183 – Civil Rights
By Rod Maggay
On February 2, 2022 two homeroom classrooms at Huntington High School in the Cabell County School District in southwestern West Virginia were brought to a school assembly. The assembly was hosted by Nik Walker of Nik Walker Ministries. Nik Walker is an evangelical preacher and his group had been hosting revival events in the area with the purpose of exposing persons to Jesus Christ and Christianity.
Situation Update # 4: The Ukraine Crisis
Brief #146 – Foreign Policy
By Abran C
On February 24, 2022, the largest assault on a European state since World War Two began as Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Russian forces entered by way of air, land, and sea quickly spreading across the country. Areas outside of the capital Kyiv, such as the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant and Ukraine’s second-largest city Kharkiv have fallen under Russian control.
Figure Skating Drama: Adults’ Ambitions Can Kill Kids’ Health
Brief #147 – Health Policy
By Yelena Korshunov
Sport is beautiful, isn’t it? Many of us enjoy watching the Olympic games on TV. Mastery of fascinating figure skating and graceful rhythmic gymnastics enchant us. But what happens behind the curtain? What price do these gracious young teenagers in a big sport pay to meet adults’ ambitions? After Kamila Valieva, Russian teen figure skater, was cleared to participate in the Games despite testing positive for a banned drug, she finished fourth in the women’s individual figure skating competition at the Beijing Olympics.
The Remington Deal With the Sandy Hook School Massacre Victims’ Parents
Brief #33 – Social Justice
By Inijah Quadri
On the 14th of December, 2012, Adam Lanza, a 20-year-old shooter, murdered children and educators using a Remington rifle lawfully owned by Lanza’s mother.
Before turning the handgun on himself as police closed in on their Newtown house, Lanza killed his mother in her bed and then took the rifle to the school and opening fire for five minutes.
As a result of Lanza’s mental illness, fascination with violence, and access to his mother’s firearms, Connecticut’s child advocate called it “a prescription for mass murder”.
Views of Odessa Residents: First Day of Putin’s Invasion
Brief #145 – Foreign Policy
By Yelena Korshunov
I spent my childhood years in Odessa, a sunny seaport city in south Ukraine, on the Black Sea shore. People of more than 133 nations and nationalities have been residing in the Odessa region for hundreds of years. This multicultural melting pot induced tolerance to each other’s traditions, cultures, and languages. That is what was engraved in my childhood memory.
Virtual Realty Education: The Future is Now.
Brief #69 – Technology
By Erik Pillar
Virtual reality in the modern age sees increased potential for online learning and education amidst the continued Covid-19 pandemic.
Biden Administration Plans to Construct an Alternative Fuel Corridor Across the Country
Brief #137 – Environment Policy
By Jacob Morton
he Biden administration announced its plan to spend $5 billion to install electric vehicle (EV) charging stations along the nation’s highways. Biden’s plan will extend over five years, providing funding directly to states that submit their own plans for developing their portion of what the administration calls an “Alternative Fuel Corridor,” that would connect forty states along interstate highways across the country. The plan seeks to build half a million charging stations by 2030 so that owners of electric vehicles will be able to find a charging port anywhere within 50 miles of their location across all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico.
Coping with Crisis: Teacher Shortages Will Last Longer than the Pandemic
Brief #50 – Education Policy
By Lynn Waldsmith
America’s teacher shortage, which was worsening even before the pandemic, is now reaching crisis levels in many parts of the country as a growing numbers of educators are not planning to ever return to the classroom.
Situation Update #3: The Ukraine Crisis
Brief #144 – Foreign Policy
By Abran C
On February 20, 2022, Belarus’ defense ministry announced that Russian troops which had been sent for military exercises and scheduled to return on Sunday would remain in the country indefinitely.
Supreme Court Inadvertently Supports Vigilante Justice In Texas Abortion Law Case
Supreme Court Inadvertently Supports Vigilante Justice In Texas Abortion Law Case
Civil Policy Brief #174 | By: Rodney A. Maggay | September 19, 2021
Header photo taken from: Dallas Morning News
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more civil rights policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: UT College of Liberal Arts
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
On September 1, 2021 the United States Supreme Court issued its order in the case Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson. The case began on July 13, 2021 when a lawsuit was filed in the Federal District Court for the Western District of Texas. The case was brought on behalf of a number of abortion providers in the State of Texas. The plaintiffs were seeking to prevent enforcement of Texas Senate Bill 8 (SB 8) before it took effect on September 1, 2021.
SB 8 bars abortions approximately six weeks after pregnancy. Additionally, the law permits any person to sue the health care provider to prevent them from performing the abortion and gives those persons who initiate a lawsuit money damages of $10,000 if they are successful in their lawsuit against the health care provider.
SB 8 was signed by Gov. Abbott and it was scheduled to become law on Sept. 1. The ACLU and others filed suit to stop the law from going into effect because they believed, correctly, it was against Roe v. Wade. The suit was going to take months and so they applied for a temporary restraining order against the law until the case was finished. An appeal was made in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals which was quickly denied. An appeal was then made to the United States Supreme Court shortly thereafter. In a 5 – 4 decision the Court declined to block SB 8 and the law went into effect on September 1, 2021. The ACLU case can still proceed to determine if the law is valid. But it will be in force starting September 1 while the ACLU case continues. LEARN MORE
Policy Analysis
While the Supreme Court’s unsigned order caused an uproar around the nation for its refusal to block enforcement of the Texas law that is clearly contrary to the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that guarantees a woman’s right to an abortion, it is the legal and procedural discussion that raised the most questions about the Texas law.
A closer examination of the Texas law and the Supreme Court order show that the Court was not interested in making a statement that they were opposed to Roe v. Wade. SB 8 was uniquely written in that the burden of enforcing the new law would not be on state officials as is typically the norm. Enforcement of SB 8 would fall on ordinary Texas citizens who would be the ones bringing the lawsuits against state health care providers.
Texas state officials would have no role in enforcing the new law. This is what the Texas officials successfully argued to the Court – “it is unclear whether the named defendants in the lawsuit can or will seek to enforce the law against the Texas applicants.” Even in the dissenting opinion penned by Chief Justice Roberts, he notes the difficulty of trying to decide the unique facts of the case – enforcement of a law by ordinary citizens and not by state officials – that itself has not been decided by Texas state courts or other federal courts and which has not gone through the usual course of legal briefing and oral arguments like most cases. The Chief Justice would have barred SB 8 from taking effect until judicial proceedings have run their course.
Photo taken from: Elle
And based on the Court’s refusal to bar enforcement of SB 8 while the trial proceeds it has inadvertently sent a message that “vigilante justice” as contemplated with this abortion law is acceptable. While the reasoning of the court was based on allowing lower state and federal courts a chance to make a decision on the unique aspects of the case first before the Supreme Court hears it – allowing private citizens to enforce SB 8 – a result of the Supreme Court order is that people are now under the impression that ordinary citizens can take matters into their own hands. Any ordinary citizen, with no personal connection to a health care provider, can bring a lawsuit.
And the motivation for the lawsuit could be based only on money, as there is a $10,000 “bounty” if the lawsuit is successful. The Supreme Court could have suspended this law while the trial on the merits of the law continued. Instead, by letting the law go into effect the Supreme Court now could embolden other states to enact a similar anti – abortion “bounty” type of law.
And now, they have even opened the door for this unique “bounty” procedure to be used in other non – abortion cases. States might see fit to use the procedure of having ordinary bring lawsuits in cases involving free speech, racial justice, protests and for personal LGBQT activities. The Supreme Court has opened the door to a frightening set of enforcement possibilities that may not be limited to just abortion rights.
The Supreme Court’s order focused on the novel question of having ordinary citizens enforce the law. There are now concerns about what that might mean for other personal rights if the “bounty” procedure spreads to other states. The Supreme Court could have shut the door on this method of “vigilante justice” but instead the Supreme Court inadvertently supported it and may have made things worse. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on image to visit resource website.
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) – press release on Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson decision.
Center for Reproductive Rights – non – profit group’s infopage on Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson case.
This brief was compiled by Rod Maggay. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief, please contact Rod@USResistnews.org.
The Frontlines of Gun Rights— Missouri’s “Second Amendment Preservation Act”
The Frontlines of Gun Rights – Missouri’s “Second Amendment Preservation Act”
Social Justice Policy Brief #27 | By: By Erika Shannon | September 27, 2021
Header photo taken from: St. Louis Public Radio
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more social justice policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: St. Louis Dispatch
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
It is no secret that here in the United States, there is an invisible line dividing those who are in favor of more gun laws, and those who are opposed. Those who are opposed to gun reform and gun laws are usually staunch supporters of the Second Amendment (the right of citizens to keep and bear arms.”). Certain states feel that gun ownership outranks the safety of their citizens, and one of those states just so happens to be Missouri. This year, Missouri passed their “Second Amendment Preservation Act,” which essentially nullifies any federal gun laws. While the passage of such a law is no shock coming from a conservative state like Missouri, some of the implications behind the law are skirting on dangerous.
According to the text of the law itself, laws and rules that collect data, restrict or prohibit the manufacture, ownership, and use of firearms and accessories/ammunition within the state of Missouri exceed the powers granted to the federal government. The only exception is to the extent that the laws are either necessary for arming official military forces or militias. This is also taken a step further, as it is declared “that all federal acts, laws, executive orders, administrative orders, court orders, rules, and regulations, whether past, present, or future, that infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms…must be invalid in this state, including those that impose a tax, levy, fee, or stamp on these items as specified in the bill.”
The focus of a law like this is on the issue of states rights. Does a state have a right to nullify any actions of the federal government in relation to the 2nd Amendment? Missouri believes they do because their interpretation of the U.S. Constitution is a literal one: that people are allowed to own firearms because our Founding Fathers said so. Missouri lawmakers are ignoring the fact that we live in a world where gun control is absolutely necessary. According to the Gun Violence Archive, there have been over 500 mass shootings in 2021 alone. An even more staggering number is the fact that the total number of deaths in 2021 related to gun violence so far is over 32,000. The numbers are disturbing, yet states like Missouri wish to prohibit the federal government from doing their job to protect American citizens. If other states follow suit, we are looking at future baked with gun violence.
Policy Analysis
Besides nullifying any federal laws, orders, or statutes related to gun control, this Missouri law also makes it illegal for law enforcement officers to enforce or attempt to enforce any federal laws infringing on the right to keep and bear arms. If a law enforcement officer, or anyone else for that matter, attempts to knowingly deprive a Missouri citizen of the right to bear arms, they will be liable to the injured party for redress, including monetary damages in the amount of $50,000 per occurrence and injunctive relief. It is clear that the state of Missouri is taking the right to gun ownership very seriously, as enforcing such hefty fines is a big step in keeping federal government gun control laws out of their land.
It is unnerving that Missouri Governor Mike Parson is on board with a law that could potentially raise crime rates even more in his state. According to the World Population Review, Missouri has the second highest homicide rates in the United States with 9.8 homicides per 100,000 people. Data from 2018 indicates that about 85% of homicides in Missouri are gun-related.
Photo taken from: St. Louis Dispatch
The fact of the matter is that Missouri is not exempt from the gun crimes that our nation is facing. Missouri should also not be exempt from following federal laws meant to protect American citizens and possibly lower the amount of gun crimes that occur.
Lawmakers of Missouri clearly care more about the Second Amendment than they do about their own citizens. With Missouri’s choice to nullify any laws that impede Second Amendment rights, there is the question of what else Missouri’s government may push back on – there is fear Missouri Republicans will attempt to flout any vaccine mandates put forth by the federal government, a move that would cause much controversy in these uncertain times. Missouri has already made one unnecessary move against federal laws, so it is hard to know where they will draw the line.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on image to visit resource website.
- To read the full text of Missouri’s Second Amendment Preservation Act, click here.
- Visit the World Population Review to learn more about crime rates in the U.S.
How Much Should You Walk for Good Health?
How Much Should You Walk for Good Health?
Health and Gender Policy Brief #133 | By: S Bhimji | September 22, 2021
Header photo taken from: The New York Times
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more health & policy briefs on our header dashboard
Photo taken from: The Conversation
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
There is no question that walking is a good form of exercise. Not only is it free but it is safe. But how much walking is adequate for good health? Talk to ten fitness experts and one will most likely get 50 different answers. Today there are all types of gadgets that can monitor the number of steps you walk and the time it takes. Exercise fanatics have been tracking their steps for decades but a definitive daily goal has never been stated based on scientific evidence.
Personal fitness trainers have been recommending 10,000 steps a day and this number is included in most fitness gadgets. But where did this number come from? Have there been studies to show that 10,000 steps are the ideal number for good health? The answer is no.
The traditional goal of 10,000 steps was in fact a marketing ploy. Way back in the 1960s, a Japanese company released a step-tracking device and called it the ‘10,000 steps meter.’ Since then many fitness gadgets have employed this number as a way to guide consumers.
But the question is ‘Are 10,000 steps a day necessary for good health? Are they too little or too many?” Do people who walk 10,000 steps a day have better health?
Policy Analysis
A recent study just published in JAMA states that walking 7,000 steps a day may lower the risk of premature death. In an era of androids, iPhones, and wearable devices, this carries more significance. No longer will people have to wonder how many steps to walk to boost their health.
This study done by Boston researchers began in 2005 when they started to track 2,110 participants between ages 38-50 and followed them for an average of 11 years. The end result was that those who walked 7,000 steps a day had a 50-70 percent lower risk of premature death, compared to participants who walked less than 7,000 steps.
What stood out in the study was the 7,000 step milestone, which made a significant difference in health. This study is in stark contrast to the 10,000 step mark first established by the Japanese. The latest study showed that the 7,000 step mark was required to lower premature death and walking more was not associated with a further lowering of the death risk.
Photo taken from: Quint Fit
This study now provides some insight into what middle-aged Americans should be aiming for every day- but it is also important to understand that there is no one number recommended by the federal government.
In the world of fitness, it has always been believed that more strenuous exercises are more effective at lowering the risk of death than walking. However, this study may help Americans view walking from a different perspective. It is important to have reachable goals that can be attained by the majority of the population.
One can start walking slowly and gradually increase the number of steps. The best thing about walking compared to many other exercises is that it can be done anywhere, it is free, allows you to enjoy nature, nurtures the mind, and is safe unless you get hit by a bus while texting.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on image to visit resource website.
Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans, 2nd edition. https://health.gov/sites/default/files/2019-09/Physical_Activity_Guidelines_2nd_edition.pdf
How much physical activity do adults need? –https://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/basics/adults/index.htm
American Heart Association Recommendations for Physical Activity in Adults and Kids
Why Universal Pre-K is So Important
Why Universal Pre-K is So Important
Education Policy Brief #59 | By: Lynn Waldsmith | September 21, 2021
Header photo taken from: Boston Public Schools
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more education policy briefs on our header dashboard
Photo taken from: Verywell Family
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The evidence is overwhelming that children who attend preschool not only dramatically improve the quality of their own lives but the welfare of their communities. Yet, far too many kids aren’t able to attend because their parents simply can’t afford it. President Biden is hoping to change that by making universal pre-K a reality, if Congress passes the $1.8 trillion American Families Plan.
The Plan calls for the federal government to invest $200 billion in universal preschool for all 3- and 4-year-olds through a national partnership with states, with states having to pay for about half of the cost when universal pre-K is fully operational. Such an investment would benefit an estimated 5 million children and save the average family $13,000.
It’s no secret that the most important years for a child’s learning and development occur from birth to age 5. And while many wealthy countries already provide free and broad access to preschool education, the United States merely offers a patchwork of private and public programs, making access to pre-kindergarten dependent on where children live and how much their parents earn.
In fact, only a handful of states and cities currently offer universal pre-K programs, including Vermont, Florida, New York City and the District of Columbia. These programs offer access to all children, though enrollment is not mandatory. Meanwhile, Colorado voters approved a tax on tobacco and vape products last year that will fund universal, free preschool for all 4-year-olds in Colorado beginning in 2023.
According to the National Institute For Early Childhood Research, about half of all 3-year-olds and a third of all 4-year-olds in the United States were not enrolled in preschool in 2019. The drought of universal pre-K programs hits children of color even harder. The Education Trust says only 1 percent of Latino children and 4 percent of Black children in the 26 states it recently analyzed are enrolled in state preschool programs.
Policy Analysis
A body of solid research has consistently shown how universal preschool benefits kids, families and society. For example, about 20 years ago (between 1997 and 2003) approximately 4,000 4-year-olds participated in a preschool lottery in Boston. Economists Christopher R. Walters, Guthrie Gray-Lobe and Parag A. Pathak studied the Boston school data surrounding these now 20-somethings, both those who attended the preschool program and those who didn’t.
They found that the children who attended just one year of preschool were less likely to get suspended from school, less likely to skip class and had a high school graduation rate of 70 percent – 6 percentage points higher than the kids who weren’t lucky enough to be selected for preschool. More than half of the preschoolers – 54 percent – went to college, eight percentage points higher than their counterparts who didn’t go to preschool. These results were bigger for boys than for girls.
But going to preschool does not necessarily translate to better performance on standardized tests. Research suggests that preschool helps kids develop “non-cognitive skills,” like emotional and social intelligence, grit and respect for the rules.
“The combination of findings — that we don’t see an impact on test scores, but we do see an impact on these behavioral outcomes and the likelihood of attending college — is consistent with this idea that there’s some kind of behavioral or socio-emotional, non-cognitive impact from preschool,” says Christopher Walters, an economist at UC Berkeley who co-authored the study.
Photo taken from: American Public Media
One of the most famous studies measuring the effects of preschool education is the Perry Preschool Project, which was conducted in Ypsilanti, Michigan by Nobel Prize-winning economist James Heckman. He has been conducting experiments and studying the results of the program from the 1960s until just a few years ago. The program provided two years of high-quality preschool for disadvantaged 3- and 4-year-olds.
Heckman found that the kids who participated were less likely to get arrested, to go on welfare or to be unemployed as adults. They also earned significantly more. In 2019, Heckman and his colleagues concluded that even the children of the children who attended the Perry preschool had markedly better outcomes in life.
For every dollar the Perry Preschool project invested in kids there was a return on investment of 7-10 percent per year, Heckman estimates, through increased economic gains for the kids and decreased public spending on them through other social programs when they got older. In fact, “the Heckman Curve” maintains that the government gets a better return on its investment the earlier it provides resources to educate people. In other words, teaching toddlers is more powerful than educating older students in high school, college or in job-training programs.
Photo taken from: CNN
Other advantages of universal preschool education include more diverse learning environments and encouraging parents to become more involved in their children’s education.
The COVID 19 pandemic seems to have made the idea of universal pre-K largely a nonpartisan issue. However Biden’s pre-K proposal still has a long way to go. There are concerns that expanding public preschool options may hurt the quality and availability of infant and toddler care. And, of course, the biggest concern is the cost.
Politicians will argue whether $200 billion is too much or too little, but the bottom line is that all kids can benefit from high quality universal pre-K, though disadvantaged children will likely benefit even more.
“We can’t be afraid of the size of the budget that’s required,” said Mary King, a professor of economics emerita at Portland State University. King told the education news outlet EdSurge that compared to the funding needed for K-12 schools, it’s a drop in the bucket. “It’s just a few years of education, and it’s critical that whatever we do is high-quality.”
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on image to visit resource website.
President Biden’s plan for universal pre-school:
The Education Trust report on how children of color and low-income children most lack access to pre-school programs:
“The Long-Term Effects of Universal Preschool in Boston”:
“Intergenerational and Intragenerational Externalities of the Perry Preschool Project”:
The Heckman Curve:
“The Effects of Tulsa’s Pre-K Program on Middle School Student Performance”:
“The Impacts of Expanding Access to High-Quality Preschool Education”:
“The Effects of Universal Preschool in Washington, D.C.”:
Monitoring of Virtual Workers: Is it Legal?
Monitoring of Virtual Workers: Is it Legal?
Health & Gender Policy Brief #132 | By: S. Bhimji | September 20, 2021
Header photo taken from: SHRM
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more health & gender policy briefs
Photo taken from: Insperity
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Because the Covid pandemic has not ended, millions of Americans still continue to work from home. And in many cases, their companies are supplying the computers and even paying for the home internet costs. But employees should not feel elated or special; the reason companies are providing the latest PCs to employees for virtual work from home is because they can be monitored.
Today, there are many tracking devices available that can monitor almost every aspect of the virtual worker including login and log-out times, the keystrokes, and all the websites that the employee visits during work hours. Even something as innocuous as Zoom video conferencing is being used to monitor employees. Employers can now use Zoom analytics to see what the employee is doing, what he/she is saying, and if they are on another website at the same time. So if you think you can pretend you are at the Zoom meeting and no one knows what you are doing- think again.
All over the USA, sales of monitoring spyware have tripled; both small and large businesses including financial services, IT companies, consulting firms, call firms and many more have been getting their PCs upgraded to include spyware to track employees.
Surveillance in the workplace is not new at all. For decades, hotels, banks, restaurants, and retail stores have used surveillance cameras to ensure employees are not stealing, taking unnecessary breaks, or treating customers poorly.
The vast majority of virtual workers may not be aware that they are monitored. But the fact is that in almost every state, the employer is under no obligation to tell the employee about the monitoring.
Policy Analysis
Unlike Europe, US employers do not need to get consent from the employee for monitoring and the laws overall tend to favor the employers but do vary from state to state.
For example U.S. Federal Telecommunications Regulation 2000, a privacy act intended to govern electronic communications, allows employers to monitor employees without the employee having given consent. However there is a fine line between legal and illegal. Only if the employer believes that the employee is involved in criminal activity, absconding, or not being productive, do they have the legal right to monitor that employee. However, in some liberal states (e.g. California), monitoring of employees is not permitted without consent. In other states, employers need to inform the employees that they will be monitored
How much the employer can monitor in the employee’s home still is debatable – recording audio and video in the home of the employee that does not pertain to work can run into legal issues. The other question is how much surveillance is done and how long will the data be maintained; will it be shared with other companies?. So far all this is a grey area and Congress has not addressed the issue.
Photo taken from: Time Doctor Blog
However for years even the federal government has been placing signs and sending regular notices to all government employees that all email is government property and there is no right to privacy during electronic communications.
So what choices does the employee have?
- Look for another virtual job but there is no guarantee that the new employer will not track you.
- Abide by the rules and work hard. This is the simplest solution.
- Go back to the office and refuse a virtual job; this is only possible if there is a physical job available.
The Microsoft Approach
To ensure that the employee is not disheartened by the monitoring, Microsoft has developed an analytical tool that measures employee performance. At the end of the month, this data is provided to the worker rather than to human resources; so that workers can see what he or she needs to do to improve productivity and yet have a balance in work-life activities.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on image to visit resource website.
The Evolution of Time Tracking
https://www.workpuls.com/blog/evolution-time-tracking
Introduction: Privacy in the Workplace
https://cyber.harvard.edu/privacy/Module3_Intronew.html
PRIVACY IN AMERICA: ELECTRONIC MONITORING
https://www.aclu.org/other/privacy-america-electronic-monitoring
Introducing A Fossil Fuel State’s Carbon-Pricing Plan
Introducing A Fossil Fuel State’s Carbon-Pricing Plan
Environment Policy Brief #130 | By: Katelyn Lewis | September 21, 2021
Header photo taken from: Fox 43
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more environmental policy briefs
Photo taken from: Times Observer
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Pennsylvania’s carbon-pricing plan cleared its final regulatory hurdle on September 1, making the Keystone State the first major fossil fuel state to adopt a cap-and-trade policy.
The plan is two-pronged: It imposes a price on carbon dioxide emissions and sets declining limits on carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. It also paves Pennsylvania’s way into the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), a consortium of nearly a dozen Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic states – Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Virginia – working “to cap and reduce CO2 emissions from the power sector,” according to the initiative’s website.
Under RGGI, each state establishes its own carbon dioxide emissions budget, setting the total amount of greenhouse gases released from fossil fuel-fired electric generating units, or EGUs. Power producers can buy credits at an annual auction, but the policy incentivizes them to lower their overall emissions as the total available decreases while making the energy market more cost-competitive for renewable energy sources, such as nuclear, wind and solar.
In Pennsylvania, this initiative translates to the dozens of coal, oil, and natural gas-fueled power plants across the state being “forced to buy hundreds of millions of dollars in credits in the coming years that the state could then spend on clean energy efforts,” the Associated Press reports. These efforts include promotion of and investments in emissions reductions and energy efficiency programs.
“By participating in RGGI, Pennsylvania is taking a historic, proactive and progressive approach that will have significant positive environmental, public health and economic impacts,” Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf said in a statement.
Over the next decade, the Wolf administration estimates the state’s GDP will increase by $2 billion while creating 27,000 jobs and eliminating up to 225 million metric tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, the Washington Examiner reports. It will simultaneously lower rates of childhood asthma, respiratory disease, premature deaths, lost work days, and healthcare costs, according to Pennsylvania’s Department of Environmental Protection (DEP).
“Participating in RGGI is one more way for Pennsylvania, which is a major electricity producer, to reduce carbon emissions and achieve our climate goals,” Wolf said. “[P]articipating in this cap-and-trade initiative will (also) allow Pennsylvania to make targeted investments that will support workers and communities affected by energy transition.”
Pennsylvania is the fifth leading carbon dioxide emitting electricity generation sector In the United States, according to the Pennsylvania Pressroom. With a regulatory limit set on carbon emissions from these electric generating units, Pennsylvania’s leaders hope the RGGI “cap and invest” program will help to reduce the state’s net greenhouse gas emissions from 2005 levels by 26% by 2025, and 80% by 2050.
The annual carbon dioxide allowance will total 78 million metric tons in the 2022 RGGI auction, according to the DEP. To hit their emissions reduction goals, this total is expected to shrink 25%, to 58 million metric tons, by 2030.
“Pennsylvania (has) moved one step closer to assuring that its residents and visitors can live healthier lives,” Patrick McDonnel, the state’s secretary for the Department of Environmental Protection, said in a statement. “Participating in RGGI will have immediate and lasting beneficial impacts on our communities.”
While the Wolf administration hopes to join the regional carbon initiative by Jan. 1, the package awaits review by Pennsylvania’s General Assembly.
Policy Analysis
The progression of Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf’s climate action plan with this carbon pricing policy in a state sometimes referred to as “The Coal State” or “The Oil State” shows a big step in the environmentally friendly direction, but it still faces an uphill battle in the state’s legislature and most likely the courts.
The plan to reduce carbon emissions in Pennsylvania has, of course, become political – in fact, the Independent Regulatory Review Commission’s vote was 3-2, falling along party lines. On one side sits many of the state’s Democrats as well as nuclear power plant owners and the renewable energy sector, while its Republicans, fossil fuel plant owners, blue-collar labor unions, and heavy industry sit adamantly on the other.
Fossil fuel-rich and heavily populated, Pennsylvania is the United States’ No. 2 in natural gas and No. 3 in coal mining production, and its energy sector releases about 34% of the state’s overall carbon dioxide emissions.
One primary argument against the plan has been its potential push of power generation to neighboring states that have no caps, destroying local coal-mining jobs and economies.
Photo taken from: Public News Service
There’s also little evidence the carbon pricing plan will significantly reduce greenhouse gases in a state that has long been one of the nation’s biggest polluters and power producers, AP reports. Its effectiveness could depend on where emissions caps are set and whether money from the emissions credits are wisely spent on clean energy and energy efficiency programs
“It’s easy to say that I’m going to stand for the environment and we will see how that shakes out,” Commission Vice Chairman John Mizner said before voting against the plan. “But when I think of those people, especially in Indiana and Armstrong [counties], whose livelihoods for generations have relied on coal, I don’t think we’ve thought enough through how we are going to help them when it’s them who are going to bear the most cost.”
Retrieved from Fox 43 (click or tap link to view video)
Proponents argue that the state can’t wait to act on climate change, and this action will put Pennsylvania ahead in the growing clean energy market while paving the way for more states and the federal government to follow suit.
“Not only is it the right thing to do, but it is in each state’s self-interest to do it,” Mark Szybist, a senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, told AP.
Its effectiveness at reaching its carbon-cutting goals therefore lie in the time it takes to navigate the state legislature, changes made in the process, the emissions caps set, and the use of the funds generated from the credit program toward sustainable and effective clean energy and energy efficiency programs.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on image to visit resource website.
Big greenhouse gas emitter moves to join climate initiative – Associated Press (Oct. 3, 2019) – https://apnews.com/article/71f1649b5dc84c99a589f7dc855f0410
Carbon pricing on Pennsylvania power generators clears latest regulatory hurdle – Washington Examiner/The Center Square (Sept. 2, 2021) – https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/carbon-pricing-on-pennsylvania-power-generators-clears-latest-regulatory-hurdle
Climate Change – Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (2015) – https://files.dep.state.pa.us/publicparticipation/citizens%20advisory%20council/cacportalfiles/Meetings/2015_01/Climate%20Change.pdf
Gov. Wolf Issues Statement on Commission Approval of RGGI – Office of Governor Tom Wolf (Sept. 1, 2021) – https://www.governor.pa.gov/newsroom/gov-wolf-issues-statement-on-commission-approval-of-rggi/
Independent Regulatory Review Commission Approves CO2 Budget Final Rulemaking – Pennsylvania Pressroom (Sept. 1, 2021) – https://www.media.pa.gov/pages/DEP_details.aspx?newsid=1488
Pennsylvania’s carbon-pricing plan at last regulatory hurdle – Associated Press (Sept. 1, 2021) – https://www.wfmz.com/news/area/poconos-coal/pennsylvanias-carbon-pricing-plan-at-last-regulatory-hurdle/article_fbf021fa-0b53-11ec-9cac-2f1548932a5e.html
Welcome – The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative – https://www.rggi.org/
Wolf’s carbon-cutting plan ‘in the public interest,’ review board finds – Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (Sept. 1, 2021) – https://www.post-gazette.com/business/powersource/2021/09/01/RGGI-carbon-dioxide-regulation-Independent-Regulatory-Review-Commission-IRRC/stories/202109010110
Reducing Persistent Child Poverty
Reducing Persistent Child Poverty
Economic Policy Brief #124 | By: Rosalind Gottfried | September 21, 2021
Header photo taken from: Population Review
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more economic policy briefs
Photo taken from: Children’s Defense Fund
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Child poverty persists in the US at a much greater rate than in other comparable countries. Among the countries in The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the US is on a par with Mexico, Chile, Turkey, and Spain on the low end of expenditures to combat child poerty. In contrast, Finland, Denmark, Poland and Spain evidence the highest spending. In spite of having the highest GDP of any country, and one of the highest per capita incomes, the US spends 1% of its GDP on family benefits in contrast to the 3.5% spent by France. As a result, 14.4% of the country’s children live in poverty. This translates into 1 in 4 Black children; 1 in 5 Hispanic children; and one in 12 non-Hispanic white children.
The causes of this persistent poverty are found in the lack of an adequate safety net, low wages with a federal minimum wage stagnant for decades, and the high cost of childcare. Low-income families spend 35% of monthly income on childcare as opposed to 7% spent in affluent families. Housing costs also play a factor with only 1 in 10 households receiving housing vouchers for which they qualify. Racist ideas regarding helping the poor also contribute to the relative stinginess of American poverty programs. Recent reductions in the IRS funding, extending a twenty-year trend, are calculated to cost one trillion dollars in avoided taxes.
Inequality and the insufficiency of the safety net have been illuminated in the disparities emerging in the pandemic rate of survival, employment, and health. Poverty has been shone to negatively impact the essential growth of the first three years of life with respect to brain development and other mental and psychological developments. These impact long term educational achievement, health, mental health, and income. Yet, it has been shown that spending ofonearly childhood education and heakthresults in a 13% return.
Policy Analysis
There is no great mystery regarding the evidence-based mechanisms to address poverty and Biden and Harris have taken steps to implement these. Biden has enacted a mandate, starting in July, to provide monthly payments for tax credits to parents, rather than waiting for tax refunds after filing for the previous year. These are paid out at $300 monthly per child under 6 to individuals earning $75,000 and couples earning up to $150,000. This will amount to $1800 by the end of the year and will be matched by another $1800 at tax filing. This program helps 88% of families with children. Parents of older children, age 6 to 17, will get $250 per month. Biden has proposed extending this payment structure through 2025 while Nancy Pelosi has proposed making it permanent.
The Republicans also have promoted programs to impact child poverty. Most notably Mitt Romney has proposed a monthly benefit of $350 for younger children and $250 for older ones in what he is calling the Family Security Plan. These payments would start four months prior to the due date during pregnancy.
Photo taken from: KUTV
Missouri Senator Josh Hawley has proposed a Parent Tax credit of $6000 for single parents and $12,000 for married couples. These plans, however, come with a reduction in other federal anti-poverty programs and tax credits for daycare.
While the child poverty rate has dropped from a whopping 27% in 1959, it has not improved significantly in recent decades. It has been noted that elderly poverty has significantly decreased during this period and is now less than the rate of child poverty. This is due to the development of the Social Security system and to Medicare. Comparable programs could be initiated for children. Many low-income families suffer with childcare, housing and medical costs; all issues which have been shown to be amenable to the development of federal programs.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on image to visit resource website.
Why Does the Richest Country in the World Have So Many Poor Kids? (Ep. 475)
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/28/child-tax-credit-biden-4-years-democrats-permanent.html
U.S. Can Become 45% Solar Powered by 2050. Too Much to Ask or Too Important to ignore?
U.S. Can Become 45% Solar Powered by 2050. Too Much to Ask or Too Important to ignore?
Environmental Policy Brief #128 | By: Jacob Morton | September 19, 2021
Header photo taken from: Department of Energy
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more environmental policy briefs here
Photo taken from: Interesting Engineering
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The Biden administration’s Department of Energy (DOE) released an encouraging report on September 8, called the Solar Futures Study, showing that solar energy has the potential to generate 40% of the nation’s electricity by 2035, and outlines how the nation could move toward producing up to 45% of its electricity from solar power by 2050.
Though solar energy only contributed less than 4% of the country’s electricity last year, that number is up from less than 1/10 of 1% in 2010. The industry is growing fast and renewable energy as a whole now provides about 20 percent of the country’s electricity. Natural gas and coal account for about 60%.
According to an earlier report by the DOE this past February, “the share of electricity produced by all renewable sources, including solar, wind and hydroelectric dams, would reach 42 percent by 2050 based on current trends and policies.” To increase the production of electricity to 45% by 2050 through solar power alone, will no doubt require the solar industry to continue to grow in a major way, but thanks to supportive policies the industry is positioned to do that.
Achieving 45% electricity generation from solar power alone is no small task, and “will require trillions of dollars in investments by homeowners, businesses and the government.” Traditionally, the primary sources of power for the electric grid have been coal, natural gas, and nuclear power plants. A decarbonized grid “would have to be almost completely remade with the addition of batteries, transmission lines and other technologies” that not only generate electricity, but that can also store that power and “send it from one corner of the country to another.”
However, the cost of solar panels has fallen substantially over the last decade, and the technology has only improved with the industry’s expansion. Over the past ten years, the cost of utility scale solar has dropped by 90% and rooftop solar 60%. Not only that, “Solar panels being installed today are 37% more efficient at converting the sun’s rays to electricity than they were 10 years ago.” The DOE’s Solar Futures report indicates that “solar panels have fallen so much in cost that they could produce 40 percent of the country’s electricity by 2035 — enough to power all American homes — and 45 percent by 2050.”
How the country will achieve this is unclear, and at the moment, the Biden administration appears to be leaving the details to Congress to decide as they work through the bipartisan infrastructure bill and the Democrats’ $3.5 trillion infrastructure measure. However, while Congress debates the specifics of implementing such a transition, the DOE’s report presents a guiding blueprint, calling for “strong decarbonization policies coupled with a massive deployment of renewable energy sources, large-scale electrification, and grid modernization.” The key findings presented in the DOE’s report include:
- A clean grid requires massive, equitable deployment of diverse, sustainable energy sources — The U.S. must install “an average of 30 GW of solar capacity per year between now and 2025 and 60 GW per year from 2025-2030. The study’s modeling further shows the remainder of a carbon-free grid supplied by wind (36%), nuclear (11%-13%), hydroelectric (5%-6%) and biopower/geothermal (1%).”
- A decarbonized power sector will create millions of cross-sector jobs – “The study modeling shows that solar will employ 500,000 to 1.5 million people across the country by 2035. Overall, the clean energy transition will generate around 3 million jobs across technologies.”
- New tools that increase grid flexibility, like storage and advanced inverters, as well as transmission expansion, will help to move solar energy to all pockets of America – Storage capabilities across the country will have to grow from “30 GW to nearly 400 GW in 2035 and 1,700 GW in 2050. Advanced tools like grid-forming inverters, forecasting, and microgrids will play a role in maintaining the reliability and performance of a renewable-dominant grid.”
- A renewable-based grid will create significant health and cost savings – Reduced carbon emissions and improved air quality would result in savings of “$1.1 trillion to $1.7 trillion, far outweighing the additional costs incurred from transitioning to clean energy. The projected price of electricity for consumers does not rise by 2035, because the costs are fully offset by savings from technological improvements,” according to the DOE.
- Supportive decarbonization policies and advanced technologies are needed to further reduce the cost of solar energy — Without a strategy that combines limits on carbon emissions with incentives for adopting clean energy, the U.S. cannot fully decarbonize the grid—”models show that grid emissions fall only 60% without policy. Continued technological advances that lower the cost of solar energy are also necessary to enable widespread solar deployment.”
Photo taken from: Quick Electricity
Alongside the report, President Biden has made clear that he wants legislators to use tax credits to encourage utilities, businesses, and homeowners to install solar power systems and batteries. The administration has also indicated it would like to see local governments make internal adjustments to speed up the permitting process for new solar projects. DOE officials also say various other incentives ought to be offered to utility companies to encourage solar energy use.
Jennifer M. Granholm, Biden’s Energy Secretary, said part of the administration’s strategy would focus on its Clean Electricity Payment Program, which would reward utilities for adding renewable energy to the electric grid, including energy generated from rooftop solar installations. Many utility companies, however, have resisted promoting rooftop solar panels because “they see a threat to their business and would rather build large solar farms that they own and control.”
Granholm says she recognizes the concern held by utility companies, but that “Both have to happen, and the utilities will be incentivized to take down the barriers.” She notes that it is a combination of strategies that will produce the greatest results for all during this transition, “We’ve got to do a series of things.”
Director of the Solar Energy Technology Office at the DOE, Becca Jones-Albertus, says of the report, “One of the things we’re hoping that people see and take from this report is that it is affordable to decarbonize the grid.” She says, “The grid will remain reliable. We just need to build.”
Policy Analysis
Some question whether the plan to reach 40% solar generated electricity by 2035 or 45% by 2050 is actually realistic. However, many analysts, despite the drastic measures required to achieve those goals, present optimism when citing the recent growth of the solar industry and the adoption of policies that have supported that growth.
As well, the impact of the recent advance in solar technology and its deployment is made even more potent by the fact that energy efficiency and electrification of homes and businesses has increased, with the potential to cut energy use in half by 2050. According to Johanna Neumann, Senior Director of Environment America’s Campaign for 100% Renewable Energy, “By reducing the amount of energy we use overall, it makes it that much easier to get more of the energy we need to power our lives from renewable sources like the sun.”
When asked how feasible it would be to achieve the DOE’s goal of 40% solar electricity by 2035, Neumann writes, “Very.” Neumann says, “We have 14 years before we hit 2035. We can achieve 40% solar and we don’t need revolutionary new policy to make it happen. But we do need a steady hand on the tiller to point America in the direction of growing renewables.” Achieving 45% solar electricity by 2050 should not be much harder.
Retrieved from Twitter
Neumann argues that “limitless energy” from the sun shines down on American communities every day, “We just need the will to put solar collectors under more of the sun’s rays to produce electricity.” She says, “The constraints are not technical. In fact, using today’s technology, America could repower itself 75 times over from the sun. So, the 40% solar ambition that the Department of Energy lays out in this new report is really very doable.”
Beyond finding the will to do it, skeptics argue that building and installing enough solar panels to generate up to 45% of the country’s power needs “will strain manufacturers and the energy industry, increasing demand for materials like aluminum, silicon, steel and glass. The industry will also need to find and train tens of thousands of workers, and quickly.” This could potentially present a significant image problem for the President, as reporting by the New York Times suggests a number of labor groups report that “in the rush to quickly build solar farms, developers often hire lower-paid nonunion workers rather than the union members Mr. Biden frequently champions.”
Trade disputes with China could also present a significant challenge to the endeavor. China dominates the supply chain for solar panels, and the administration recently began blocking imports connected with the Xinjiang region of China over concerns about the use of forced labor. According to energy experts, at least in the short term, the import ban could slow the development of solar projects in the United States.
Additionally, the need for batteries to store energy generated by solar panels will increase, and though the cost of batteries has been falling, many analysts say the cost remains too high for such a rapid shift to renewables and electric cars.
Photo taken from: Reuters
Despite these challenges, most energy analysts contend that without a massive increase in the use of solar energy, it would be impossible to achieve the President’s climate goals. “No matter how you slice it, you need solar deployments to double or quadruple in the near term,” says Michelle Davis, a principal analyst at the energy research and consulting firm, Wood Mackenzie. “Supply chain constraints are certainly on everyone’s mind.”
The need for decarbonization is here, now more than ever. According to a new report released by the United Nations this past Friday, “the planet is on track to warm by more than 2.7 degrees Celsius by the end of the century.” This is in grim contrast to the maximum limit of warming set by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in August, of 2 degrees Celsius (but better yet 1.5 degrees C) that is needed “to prevent the most severe climate consequences and suffering, especially of the most vulnerable, throughout the world.”
Heeding this call to action, Energy Secretary Granholm points to her Department’s Solar Futures report, saying, “The study illuminates the fact that solar, our cheapest and fastest-growing source of clean energy, could produce enough electricity to power all of the homes in the U.S. by 2035 and employ as many as 1.5 million people in the process.” Granholm says, “Achieving this bright future requires a massive and equitable deployment of renewable energy and strong decarbonization policies – exactly what is laid out in the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and President Biden’s Build Back Better agenda.”
Bernadette Del Chiaro, Executive Director of the California Solar and Storage Association, representing solar developers in the industry’s most active state, says, “In essence the D.O.E. is saying America needs a ton more solar, not less, and we need it today, not tomorrow.” Del Chiaro argues, “That simple call to action should guide every policymaking decision from city councils to legislatures and regulatory agencies across the country.”
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on image to visit resource website.
Environment America (Voices for 100% Renewable Energy) – A national network of 29 state environmental groups with members and supporters in every state. Together, the Environment America network focuses on timely, targeted action that wins tangible improvements in the quality of our environment and our lives.
Sierra Club (Ready For 100) – It’s time for 100% clean energy for, of, and by the people. Clean energy is here. Let’s make it for everyone. City by city and state by state, it’s time for an equitable and just transition to 100% clean, renewable energy. Communities are ready for 100%. Find a Ready For 100 campaign or city that is committed to—or powered by—100% clean energy near you. Learn more or take action now!
Clean Air Task Force (CATF.us) – Catalyzing resilient solutions, scaled to meet the climate challenge. Every year people produce almost forty billion tons of carbon dioxide that is pumped into the atmosphere – that’s a hundred times faster than the Earth has ever seen. If we don’t take action, our planet will change far faster than we can adapt. This is the mother of all environmental problems, and the Clean Air Task Force is on it.
References
Click or tap on image to visit resource website.
Neumann, J. (2021, September 10). Our solar FUTURE: Reacting to a new Department of energy report. Environment America. Retrieved September 18, 2021, from https://environmentamerica.org/blogs/environment-america-blog/ame/our-solar-future-reacting-new-department-energy-report.
Baxter-Griffith, L., Schneider, C., & Davis, S. (2021, August). Clean Electricity Payment Program. Clean Air Task Force. Retrieved September 18, 2021, from https://www.catf.us/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/CATF_CEPP_2Pager_08.05.21.pdf.
Booth, W. (2021, September 17). As climate pledges fall short, U.N. Predicts globe could warm by CATASTROPHIC 2.7 degrees Celsius. The Washington Post. Retrieved September 18, 2021, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2021/09/17/un-climate-2030-biden/.
DOE releases Solar Futures Study providing the blueprint for a ZERO-CARBON GRID. Energy.gov. (2021, September 8). Retrieved September 18, 2021, from https://www.energy.gov/articles/doe-releases-solar-futures-study-providing-blueprint-zero-carbon-grid.
Solar futures study. Energy.gov. (2021, September 8). Retrieved September 18, 2021, from https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/solar-futures-study.
Penn, I. (2021, September 8). From 4% TO 45%: Biden OFFERS Ambitious blueprint for solar energy. The New York Times. Retrieved September 18, 2021, from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/08/business/energy-environment/biden-solar-energy-climate-change.html.
United Nations. (2021, September 17). Full NDC Synthesis Report: Some Progress, but Still a Big Concern. unfccc.int. Retrieved September 18, 2021, from https://unfccc.int/news/full-ndc-synthesis-report-some-progress-but-still-a-big-concern.
President Biden’s Important 30×30 Environmental Policy Goal
President Biden’s Important 30×30 Environmental Policy Goal
Environment Policy Brief #127 | By: Tim Loftus | September 16, 2021
Header photo taken from: KSN-TV
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more environmental policy briefs here
Photo taken from: Joe Biden for President
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
President Biden wasted no time in making clear his position on climate change. One week after Inauguration Day last January, an Executive Order on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad was issued that, among other things, “… encourage broad participation in the goal of conserving 30 percent of our American lands and water by 2030.”
In the first of two parts, Executive Order 14008 places the climate crisis at the center of foreign policy and national security. International efforts are to be collaborative and multilateral, comprehensive, and ambitious in ways that both recognize the current threats and the trajectory of consequences if insufficient action is taken to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The second part is focused on the home-front where the executive order promises a “government-wide approach” to the crisis at hand. In short, this approach brings the considerable workforce, financing and spending power, and influence of federal government actions, to bear on the matter at the heart of the policy.
In addition to supporting climate change adaptation efforts and clean energy goals, the 30×30 policy goal aims to support biodiversity, now in grave decline from the sixth extinction event underway on Earth. The President’s executive order represents the first-of-its-kind goal of coordinated and proactive stewardship of nature in our country. In a follow-up report to the newly formed National Climate Task Force and titled “Conserving and Restoring America the Beautiful” the emphasis on the role and importance of nature in our collective health, well-being, and prosperity – in short, our way of life – is repeated and unmistakable. And the 30×30 policy goal is deemed essential for the stewardship of nature called for. With both the policy and first report, coauthored by the secretaries of Interior, Agriculture, Commerce, and the Council on Environmental Quality, an inclusive and practical roadmap is laid out for achieving the goal.
The 30×30 policy goal is also poised to address inequitable access to the outdoors that people of color and those of lower income are too often faced with. The data make clear that disadvantaged segments of American society commonly lack access to clean air, clean water, and access to nature. Thus, the 30×30 goal offers a timely acknowledgment of interrelated and urgent issues that pose a threat to life as we have known it to be.
Policy Analysis
Federal leadership to mitigate climate change (i.e., reduce greenhouse gas emissions) and slow down or halt the disappearance of nature has arrived and not a moment too soon. We the American people have ten years to take action and achieve results. Beginning in 2022, annual reports will be made available by various government entities to assess our progress. And the good news is the 30×30 policy goal is guided by eight core principles that are practical, common-sense, and seemingly noncontroversial. Among them are a commitment to a collaborative and inclusive approach to conservation, support for locally-led and locally-designed conservation efforts, support for the priorities of tribal nations, and respect for private-property rights with support for the stewardship efforts provided voluntarily by private landowners.
According to the Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) compiled by the U.S. Geological Survey, Gap Analysis Project, approximately 13 percent of land in the U.S. is currently protected (i.e., assigned to GAP Status Codes 1 and 2.) While not “starting from scratch,” there remains much work to do to achieve the policy goal.
Photo taken from: KRWG
Several states (e.g., California, Nevada, Maine) are declaring their own complementary goal. Last month, for example, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico issued Executive Order 2021-052, “Protecting New Mexico’s Lands, Watersheds, Wildlife, and Natural Heritage” that sets the goal of having at least 30 percent (30%) of all lands in New Mexico conserved by 2030, with an additional twenty percent (20%) designated as climate stabilization areas. New Mexico like most western states features above-average biodiversity, a relatively low population density, and a considerable base of public land. Furthermore, the state’s outdoor economy supports $1.2 billion in income, over 33,000 jobs, and attracts 15.2 million visitors a year according to the preamble in the executive order. Governor Lujan Grisham makes clear that private working lands are threatened by climate change too and have equal opportunity to voluntarily participate in ways that work for all parties involved.
Retrieved from Twitter
It’s also worth noting that conservation efforts in the USA that are guided by this new policy goal, are not occurring in a vacuum. Similar efforts have been underway globally as guided by Biodiversity Target 11 of the Aichi Convention established for the decade ending in 2020. The Aichi Biodiversity Targets are a component of a revised and updated strategic plan to conserve biodiversity across the globe. The international Convention on Biological Diversity continues to build on the plan with its “Sharm El-Sheikh to Kunming Action Agenda for Nature and People” and is an important global corollary to new actions in America that have been catalyzed by President Biden’s executive order.
Finally, the policy goal of 30×30 is supported by policy-makers like city mayors to policy shapers including nongovernmental organizations such as the Center for Biological Diversity and Defenders of Wildlife. The momentum already generated by Executive Order 14008 is encouraging and will need to be sustained to achieve the policy goal.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on image to visit resource website.
Center for Western Priorities. 2021. Road to 30: A Bold Vision for Conserving 30% of America. THE ROAD TO 30 (accessed September 16, 2021)
Convention on Biological Diversity. 2021. PRESS RELEASE: CBD Secretariat’s new Action Agenda platform fosters “whole-of-society approach” to showcase commitments and actions from non-state actors to put biodiversity on a path to recovery by 2030. pr-2021-08-18-actionagenda-en.pdf (cbd.int) (accessed September 16, 2021)
Convention on Biological Diversity. 2020. Aichi Biodiversity Targets. Aichi Biodiversity Targets (cbd.int) (accessed September 16, 2021)
Defenders of Wildlife. 2020. Getting to 30X30: Guidelines for Decision-Makers. Getting to 30×30: Guidelines for Decision-makers | Defenders of Wildlife (accessed September 16, 2021)
Kolbert, Elizabeth. 2014. The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History. New York, NY: Picador. 319 p.
State of New Mexico. 2021. Executive Order 2021-052: Protecting New Mexico’s Lands, Watersheds, Wildlife, and Natural Heritage E0-2021-052-30-by-30.pdf (nmwild.org) (accessed September 16, 2021)
The White House. 2021. Executive Order on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad. Executive Order on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad | The White House (accessed September 16, 2021)
U.S. Dept. of Interior, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, U.S. Dept. of Commerce, and Council on Environmental Quality. 2021. Conserving and Restoring America the Beautiful. Report: Conserving and Restoring America the Beautiful 2021 (doi.gov) (accessed September 16, 2021)
U.S. Geological Society. 2021. Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) 2.1 Summary Statistics by Public Access CategoryProtected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) 2.1 Summary Statistics by Public Access Category – ScienceBase-Catalog (accessed September 16, 2021)
U.S. Geological Society. 2021.Analysis of Updated USGS Database Finds Increase in America’s Lands and Waters Managed for Biodiversity. Analysis of Updated USGS Database Finds Increase in America’s Lands and Waters Managed for Biodiversity (accessed September 20, 2021)
Afghan Refugee Resettlement in Post-Trump America
Afghan Refugee Resettlement in Post-Trump America
Immigration Policy Brief #129 | By: Kathryn Baron | September 19, 2021
Header photo taken from: Council on Foreign Relations
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more immigration policy briefs here
Photo taken from: Roll Call
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The United States has already evacuated over 65,000 Afghans and nearly 24,000 have arrived in the US. In addition, 23,000 are on US military bases abroad and another 20,000 are waiting in other countries before continuing their travels to the US.
The Biden Administration has asked Congress for $6.5 billion in emergency funds to assist in resettlement endeavors. As of now, Afghan refugees are to receive $1,255 of government funds to help with some expenses but are not eligible for food stamps or Medicaid at this time.
California and Texas will receive the largest amount of Afghan refugees (of the US states accepting Afghan refugees); the Biden Administration is striving to bring 65,000 Afghans to the US by the end of September and an additional 30,000 in 2022.
Policy Analysis
Most Afghans are arriving in the US under humanitarian parole rather than as refugees, so the administration can get around the Trump era lowered refugee cap (see below) and the process could be expedited. The regular refugee process can take around 2 years, in an already backlogged system. Many will have to apply for asylum and/or reunite with family members already in the US for quicker resettlement.
Prior to the Trump Administration, there was bipartisan support in Congress for refugee resettlement and generally widespread public support. The Muslim Ban of 2017 effectively barred most refugees from Syria and Yemen and allowed for the refugee cap to be lowered from 110,000 to 15,000 annually.
Photo taken from: Wall Street Journal
Money was also allocated to other agencies at the expense of the 9 existing refugee resettlement agencies. Until the US raises its refugee cap to pre-Trump levels, existing resettlement programs will continue to be overwhelmed and it will be increasingly difficult to resettle refugees in a timely manner.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on image to visit resource website.
- National Immigration Law Center: an organization that exclusively dedicates itself to defending and furthering the rights of low income immigrants and strives to educate decision makers on the impacts and effects of their policies on this overlooked part of the population.
- Miles 4 Migrants: A charity that accepts frequent flyer mile donations to help individuals impacted by war, persecution, and/or disaster by providing flights for refugees, asylum-seekers, and their immediate family members who have legal approval for travel but cannot afford it.
- Protect Afghan Women: A project affiliated by the Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace, and Security to focus on the role women play in preventing conflict and building peace, addressing global threats, and seeking to ensure Afghan women are free from persecution.