JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
Offshore Turbines a Windfall for the Transition to Cleaner Energy
Brief #136 – Environmental Policy
By Todd J. Broadman
Today, 67,000 wind turbines are spinning kilowatts of energy throughout the country. That is the wind behind President Biden’s back in his recent wind energy initiative; that, and his pledge is to cut the nation’s fossil fuel emissions 50 percent from 2005 levels by 2030. The cost to make and deploy wind energy has gone down over 50 percent since 2008. The administration wants to seize the moment; the plan is to install 30 gigawatts (GW) of offshore wind turbines in U.S. waters by 2030.
Semaglutide: Is it The Panacea for Weight Loss?
Brief #139 – Health & Gender Policy
By S. Bhimji
There are over 70 million Americans who are considered obese and 99 million more who are said to be overweight. Today obesity has replaced smoking as public health enemy number one. Obesity has repercussions beyond just excess weight- it negatively affects almost every organ in the body and shortens the lifespan.
Climate Change Poses A National Security Threat Says 2 New U.S. Government Reports
Brief #134 – Environmental Policy
By Katelyn Lewis
In dual reports, the U.S. Department of Defense and the National Intelligence Council reached the same conclusion: Climate change poses an exacerbating, adverse effect on national security.
“To keep the nation secure, we must tackle the existential threat of climate change,” the DoD Climate Risk Analysis (DCRA) report said.
Both evidence-based reports were released on Oct. 21 in response to Executive Order 14008.
Surveillance Technology: A Useful Tool or a Threat to Our Security
Brief #65 – Technology
By Stephan Lherissen
Cities around the nation are adopting legislation that puts limits on the use of surveillance technology by their respective police forces. These cities are at the forefront of policy that could be adopted nationally by the federal government. These laws are being considered by some and established by others in response to growing criticism that these technologies do not respect the rights and privacy of citizens.
Future of School Mask Mandates Remains Uncertain
Brief #60 – Education Policy
By Lynn Waldsmith
Growing numbers of school districts are easing mask mandates in the face of pressure from Republican state lawmakers, strong opposition from parents and as the latest wave of Covid-19 appears to be declining in many parts of the country.
Supreme Court Passes On Chance To Modify The Qualified Immunity Doctrine
Brief #177 – Civil Rights
By Rodney A. Maggay
In Rivas – Villegas v. Cortesluna, Officer Daniel Rivas – Villegas responded to the scene of a 911 call. Upon arriving at the home he found a mother and her two daughters barricaded in a room trying to hide from the mother’s boyfriend. Ramon Cortesluna, the mother’s boyfriend, was in possession of a chainsaw and was destroying items in the house.
The U.S. House Select Committee Investigation of the January 6 Attack on the Capitol: Part 3
Brief #30 – Elections & Politics
By Erika Shannon
As the investigation into the January 6th Capitol Riots continues, it is becoming clear that getting to the bottom of that day’s events will be no easy task. There were already hurdles to overcome with the formation of a committee to investigate the day’s events; now that the committee is working towards piecing together what truly happened, more obstacles stand in the way.
Climate Change, Silent Killer of the World’s Precious Coral Reefs
Brief #133 – Environment Policy
By Jacob Morton
The world’s coral reefs are dying, and humans are to blame. 14 percent of the world’s coral reefs perished within just ten years from 2009 to 2019, says a report released earlier this month by the International Coral Reef Initiative, a partnership of countries and organizations that works to protect the world’s coral reefs. The cause? Climate change. If we act now, we may have a chance at redemption.
The Changing Faces of American Drone Warfare Policy
Brief #135 – Foreign Policy
By Reilly Fitzgerald
The issue of drones is one that is coming into further examination in recent weeks as President Joe Biden ordered a drone strike within Afghanistan on August 29th which killed numerous civilians. The Afghanistan debacle has drawn criticism from political circles in the United States, in the international community, and other foreign policy experts; and as it first hit the news in the last few days, the solution of the United States government is to pay the families of the victims for their losses.
Prospects for the Biden Agenda (Part 1)
Prospects for the Biden Agenda (Part 1)
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #24 |
By: William Bourque | July 7, 2021
Header photo taken from: The New York Times
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more elections & politics policy briefs
Photo taken from: Vox.com
In this new series U.S. RESIST NEWS Reporter William Bourque examines the feasibility of implementing the different components of President Biden’s ambitious policy agenda. In Part 1 of the series we examine prospects for passage of Biden proposals in the areas of voting rights and gun control.
Voting Rights
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
After President Biden’s hard-fought victory in November, it became clear that who can vote and how they can vote would become a national talking point in his first months in office. Indeed, President Biden has focused on voting rights but has yet to push a voting rights bill through the heavily divided Congress.
The “For The People” Act, was blocked by Senate Republicans before any debate or discussion even occurred. Essentially, this bill “addresses voter access, election integrity and security, campaign finance, and ethics for the three branches of government”. This, of course, is a wide-ranging piece of legislation, which is one reason many Senate Republicans didn’t even let the bill go to the floor for debate. It seems unlikely that Biden will be able to pass a bill with the sweeping reforms of the “For The People” act.
However, it is entirely possible that the President will be able to pass a series of common sense election laws that would eliminate many of the state-by-state irregularities. For instance, we believe Biden may first take a step to reduce partisan gerrymandering by establishing laws for independent districting committees, which is a large part of the “For The People” act. Additionally, Biden may opt to expand voter registration to ensure that every state allows same-day registration. All in all, we believe that Biden has a good shot at getting individual parts of the “For The People” act passed, but getting the more progressive portions, such as a ban on removing voters from voter rolls, will probably take significant effort and most likely won’t be passed this term.
Gun Control
Gun control was a prominent campaign issue for President Biden. In his first several months in office, the Biden Administration worked closely with congressional Democrats to close several loopholes in our gun-purchasing laws. A bipartisan Senate coalition is working towards eliminating “ghost guns”, which are weapons purchased without a background check and with no serial number and thus, no way to trace them. In the House, the “Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2021” has passed the house and awaits a vote in the Senate, where it will face a test of Republican approval. This act makes sure that every legal firearm sale is done with an extensive background check, which would limit the sale of legal firearms to individuals who are unfit to own or operate one. However, it still will be a hard fought battle to bring more moderate Republicans like Susan Collins on board with this bill.
Photo taken from: Britannica.com
As Biden pointed out on the campaign trail, repeatedly,” there’s no time to wait to act on this issue. So my view is that this should be a priority for him,” said Igor Volsky of Guns Down America. Many more progressive members of both the House and Senate hoped that Biden would do more when it came to gun control, but it seems as though he is focused on passing attainable, bipartisan legislation before moving onto more drastic change. We think that, if Biden can get the “Bipartisan Background Checks Act” through the Senate, it will be a sign of greater action and legislation to come. However, if the bill stalls, it reflects the fact that that many Americans still have this notion that Biden and democrats want to take away their guns.
Many Legal Challenges to Georgia’s Restrictive Voting Law: Can They Succeed?
Brief #23 – Elections and Politics
Many Legal Challenges to Georgia’s Restrictive Voting Law: Can They Succeed?
By Zack Huffman
July 7, 2021
Policy Summary
Attorney General Merrick Garland announced, on June 25, that the Department of Justice was suing the State of Georgia in federal court to overturn Georgia’s recently-passed voter restriction law.
The new Georgia law, which was passed by Republicans along partisan lines, creates new hurdles for voter registration and for absentee voting, while making it easier for voters to be removed from the rolls.
“The Georgia legislature enacted SB 202 with knowledge of the disproportionate effect that these provisions, both singly and together, would have on Black voters’ ability to participate in the political process on an equal basis with white voters,” said the 46-page lawsuit filed in the Northern U.S. District Court of Georgia.
The lawsuit was announced less than a week after Democrats in the United States Senate failed to overcome a GOP filibuster of the Democrats’ attempt to overhaul federal voting rights. The DOJ’s legal action is actually the eighth court challenge since the Georgia law was signed three months prior by Governor Brian Kemp on March 25, 2021.
Policy Analysis
Governor Brian Kemp and the Georgia GOP passed a wide-sweeping election law overhaul in March, 2021, in part to assuage anger from Trump supporters in the state that Kemp would need for reelection in 2022. Kemp was first elected governor in 2018 in a close race after using his former position as Secretary of State to purge hundreds of thousands of voters from the state rolls.
Two years later Kemp, who was consistently an outspoken supporter of President Donald Trump, found himself under fire from Trump supporters after Biden became the first Democrat since Bill Clinton to win the Peach State. The Trump supporters argued that Georgia’s 16 electoral votes were stolen through fraud of some sort. No proof was ever presented and multiple audits failed to uncover electoral shenanigans, but many supporters still felt that Kemp had betrayed the Republican Party by not overriding the vote in favor of Trump.
Georgia’s new voter law, which just went into effect on July 1, requires voter ID for absentee ballots, limits the use of ballot drop boxes, expands early in-person voting, bars sending unsolicited absentee ballot request forms, reduces the amount of time available for requesting absentee ballots, increases voting stations to alleviate long lines, but limits drop box hours, makes it a crime for groups to provide food or water to voters waiting in line, gives the state greater control over election administration, and shortens the length of runoff elections.
Private citizens are not allowed to challenge the voter registration of any other voter, which is a method that Texas-based group True the Vote is using to challenge the legitimacy of over 364,000 Georgia voters through local surrogates, according to reports from investigative journalist Greg Palast.
The new Georgia law can trace its roots back to the 2013 5-4 decision from the U.S. Supreme Court in Shelby v. Holder, which stripped the 1965 Voting Rights Act of a requirement that states with a history of voter disenfranchisement could not enact new voting restrictions without prior consent from the federal government.
The DOJ’s lawsuit asks the court to invalidate every aspect of the new law that restricts voting or registration in any way, to authorize the appointment of federal observers and to restore the requirement that Georgia obtain federal pre-approval before making any additional changes to its election laws.
On the same day governor Kemp signed the bill into law, The New Georgia Project, Black Voters Matter Fund and Rise Inc. sued the state over the increased voter ID requirements, tighter restrictions on submitting applications for absentee ballots, shorter run off elections and the ability of a private citizen to challenge the voter status of anyone in the state.
A few days later, on March 29, the Georgia NAACP, Georgia Coalition for the People’s Agenda, League of Women Voters of Georgia, Galeo Latino Community Development Fund, Common Cause and the Lower Muskogee Creek Tribe all sued over the ID requirements, new absentee and provisional voting rules
The Sixth District African Methodist Episcopal Church, the Georgia Muslim Voter Project, Women Watch Afrika, the Latino Community Fund of Georgia and the Delta Sigma Theta Sorority filed their own lawsuit on March 29. – basically sued to change the whole law.
Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Atlanta sued the state on April 1, over the new absentee and provisional ballot rules arguing that the expansion of absentee ballot options in 2020, due to COVID-19, helped double the turnout of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders from 2016.
VoteAmerica, Voter Participation Center and Center for Voter Information filed suit on April 7, arguing that the new restrictions on absentee voting and voter registration places on unfair and costly burden on organizations, such as themselves, that work on increasing voter turnout.
A collections of churches sued on April 27 to void the law, which they argued unfairly targets get-out-the-vote methods that are traditionally used by Black voters and other voters of color in Georgia, such as providing food and water to voters waiting in line, coordinating rides to polling places and distributing applications for voter registration and absentee ballots.
The Coalition for Good Governance, Jackson County Democratic Committee, and the Georgia Advancing Progress Political Action Committee sued to oppose the absentee and provisional voting changes, and also sued to halt the legislature from being able to replace local election boards with their own partisan board members.
The state has already filed motions to dismiss the first five suits, based on the organizations’ failure to show actual damage that the organizations have endured as a result of the new law. The state will likely file similar motions in the three most recent lawsuits in the next month, based on the timeline of the first five.
That requirement to establish standing or actual damages is likely to make success difficult for the majority of the lawsuits, though the Department of Justice brings more resources for litigation that can make it easier to use the lawsuit to pressure the Georgia GOP into making some conciliatory concessions on enforcement of the voting law.
Engagement Resources
Democracy Docket is currently maintaining a list of current lawsuits in Georgia over voting rights, along with recent court filings.
https://www.democracydocket.com/state/georgia/?by_case_type=active-cases
Justice Department sues Georgia over new voting law
https://www.ajc.com/politics/feds-sue-georgia-over-new-voting-law/BWMKLI2XJNHIVPCUKJ2HXCDEFY/
Guardian: GOP candidate improperly purged 340,000 from Georgia voter rolls, investigation claims
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/oct/19/georgia-governor-race-voter-suppression-brian-kemp
Truthout: Georgia GOP’s New Voter Suppression Tactic Violates Anti-Klan Law Passed in 1871
Truthout: Georgia’s New Voting Law is Rife With Hidden Horrors
https://truthout.org/articles/georgias-new-voting-law-is-rife-with-hidden-horrors/
Atlanta Journal Constitution: DOJ is the latest to sue over Georgia’s voting law; here are the others
College Athletes Can Now Earn Money
Brief # 57 – Education Policy
College Athletes Can Now Earn Money
By Lynn Waldsmith
July 7, 2021
Policy Summary
For the first time, college athletes can profit from their name, image and likeness (known as “N.I.L.), now that the NCAA decided to allow the historic change in a surrender to growing pressure from states and the Supreme Court. While student athletes still cannot be directly paid by the schools they represent, the sweeping change to the NCAA’s longstanding policy that student athletes not receive any form of payment, other than scholarships that cover tuition, room and board, opens the door to that possibility in the future.
The decision means college athletes have the potential to make millions from endorsement deals, selling autographs, social media business opportunities, etc. The NCAA’s announcement on the interim N.I.L. policy was made on June 30, just 9 days after the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the NCAA may not place limits on education-related benefits, such as laptops, paid internships, study abroad opportunities and post-graduate opportunities.
The NCAA, which earns more than a billion dollars a year, “is not above the law,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in his concurring opinion. He added that the NCAA amateur model of not paying student athletes “would be flatly illegal in almost any other industry in America.”
In addition to the Supreme Court decision, the NCAA has been in the cross hairs of numerous states that have passed laws to allow student athletes to earn money from N.I.L. opportunities. Alabama, Florida and Georgia have such laws that took effort on July 1. California, New Jersey, Nebraska, New Mexico, Arizona, Michigan and Colorado are among the states with similar laws that will soon follow.
The interim N.I.L. policy from the NCAA applies to universities in Division I, whose members are the most well-known in college sports: the Atlantic Coast, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and Southeastern conferences. NCAA officials in Divisions II and III are expected to approve similar policy changes.
Policy Analysis
Many student athletes will earn only a modest, if any, income from N.I.L. opportunities, while others – most likely star football and basketball athletes – could earn tens of thousands, if not millions of dollars. And unless Congress comes to the aid of the NCAA, which is considered unlikely, the seismic shift in college sports prompts further questions about what changes may be forthcoming in the quest to achieve fair and equitable compensation for student athletes.
While some have suggested paying student athletes with salary caps to create a level playing field, Justice Kavanaugh suggested that collective bargaining be used “to provide student athletes a fairer share of the revenues that they generate for their colleges, akin to how professional football and basketball players have negotiated for a share of league revenues.”
Sen. Cory Brooker (D-New Jersey), has introduced the College Athletes Bill of Rights. It would require revenue-generating sports to share 50 percent of their profit with the athletes from that sport after accounting for the cost of scholarships.
“I know firsthand that college sports can open doors of opportunity that most young people never knew existed—but the unfortunate reality is that the NCAA is also exploiting college athletes for financial gain, and disproportionately exploiting Black athletes who are over-represented in the revenue generating sports,” Sen. Booker said. “Under its current operation, the NCAA is preventing college athletes from earning any meaningful compensation and failing to keep the athletes under its charge healthy and safe, and that needs to change.”
University of Notre Dame President John I. Jenkins opposes the idea of colleges compensating their student athletes, but he advocates for the creation of national policies that he says would reduce the exploitation of African-American students, in particular. These include allowing a scholarship to stay with a student athlete through graduation, regardless of injuries or performance on the field, and limiting the number of days during any academic term that a school may require its students to be away from campus for athletic purposes.
Engagement Resources
The NCAA’s new name, image and likeness rules and resources:
https://www.ncaa.org/about/taking-action
College Athletes Bill of Rights:
Georgia’s U.S. Senators Introduce Voting Bill To Limit Politicization of Elections
Brief # 168 – Civil Rights
Georgia’s U.S. Senators Introduce Voting Bill To Limit Politicization of Elections
By Rodney A. Maggay
June 30, 2021
Policy Summary
On June 21, 2021, Georgia Democratic Senators Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff along with three other Senators introduced the Preventing Election Subversion Act of 2021. The bill contains five parts:
[1] requires a “for cause” standard in order to limit arbitrary and unlimited removals of local election officials and provides a federal cause of action to enforce this standard,
[2] allows local election officials who have been subject to removal proceedings by a state elections board to remove that proceeding to federal district court,
[3] makes it a federal crime to attempt to or actually intimidate or harass an election worker,
[4] establishes a minimum buffer zone to limit how close a poll observer may come within a voter or ballot at a polling station, and
[5] requires challenges by a person to a voter’s eligibility to register to vote or to cast a ballot, other than from an election official, to be supported by personal knowledge with respect to each individual challenged.
Senator Ossoff stated, “This legislation will ensure nonpartisan election officials can carry out free and fair elections without partisan interference and help safeguard the sacred right to vote.” Additionally, Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), who is chair of the Senate rules Committee, said, “We need to respond to these threats to our democracy head on which is why this legislation to protect election workers and prohibit voter intimidation tactics is so vital.” And finally, Senator Warnock stated “we can’t allow power-hungry state actors to squeeze the people out of their own democracy by overruling the decisions of local election officials.” LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE
Policy Analysis
Article 1, Section 4, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution provides “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations[.]” This provision is key because it is the basis for a talking point Republicans have been making in their opposition to voting related bills. They believe that the conduct of elections resides with each individual state and that voting bills supported by Democrats is “federalizing elections” or, taking this power away from the states. However, the bill introduced by Sens. Ossoff and Warnock is not usurping power but instead addressing a problem that arose after the 2020 election. The bill does not propose an outright ban of state legislators trying to overturn an election but instead focuses on the tactics used to pressure or intimidate local election officials to “find a different result.”
The Preventing Election Subversion Act of 2021 addresses when state election officials are pressured to ensure a specific result that does not match the final election numbers and the threats, intimidation and harassment that come with those situations. The dominant theme of this bill is that it seeks to minimize the politicization of election challenges, such as trying to overturn election results, that have become all too common in the weeks after the 2020 election.
After Donald Trump lost the election to Joe Biden, Mr. Trump went on a campaign to try and have the election results in a number of states overturned even though the results showed that he lost. In one notorious incident, then President Trump tried to pressure Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensberger to overturn the results of the election in Georgia. Mr. Raffensberger rebuffed the President and stated that Biden’s win in Georgia was accurate. But that was not the end of it as local elections officials received threats in a number of states as state legislators made efforts to wrest control of elections and final certification of results from state elections officials.
According to the Brennan Center for Justice, they interviewed a number of local election officials and officials recounted stories of being pressured by partisan actors to interfere with the administration of elections or to favor candidates of a political party. By having state bills enacted that strips authority for elections from state election officials and giving final approval to state legislators the danger is that highly partisan state legislators will not approve or certify an election result if the result is not what the state representative or legislative chamber had hoped. A Republican controlled chamber would have the power to withhold approval of an election that a Democratic candidate wins and vice versa.
This act being introduced is intended to provide the legal resources to limit the role politics and partisanship have in the overall conduct and ultimate administration of local and statewide elections. State and local elections officials would be provided an avenue for redress in federal court if they feel the performance of their duties has come under undue partisan influence. It would make it a federal crime if an election worker were harassed or intimidated for performing their election related duties.
And it requires more physical distance between poll observers and voters as some poll observers were not shy about displaying their partisan loyalties during the 2020 election, which could be seen as intimidating to a voter as they observed him or her voting. While the other voting bills have gotten more attention the Preventing Election Subversion Act of 2021 is just as important due to its efforts to address the politicization of the administration and certification of elections. If Republicans are serious about securing the integrity of elections, as they like to proclaim, this is a bill they should scrutinize with an open mind and eventually support. A full debate in Congress and a closer look as to the merits of the bill is what this important voting rights bill deserves. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
Brennan Center for Justice – recently issued report compiled by group on how to protect election administrators and officials.
Democracy Docket – group with comprehensive database on current voting cases and voting bills/laws.
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.
Crime is on the Rise in U.S. Cities: Is there a Plan?
Brief # 19 – Social Justice
Crime is on the Rise in U.S. Cities: Is there a Plan?
By Erika Shannon
July 5, 2021
The year 2021 has, fortunately, brought people many things to look forward to. With the pandemic beginning to get under control, people are excited to resume their normal lives. Unfortunately, this year has also brought over 250 mass shootings in the United States, along with a rise in other violent crimes. While pandemic-related restrictions lowered crime rates in certain places, many cities saw a continued rise in crime, even during the pandemic. Cities across the U.S. are reeling in the wake of their citizens being shot, and often killed, fairly regularly. Many of these shootings are youth related.
The rise in violent crimes in the past several years does not come as a shock to many, as racial and political tensions have been rising in the U.S. With Donald Trump at the reins for four years, there weren’t many laws introduced that were specifically aimed at reducing gun violence and crime in America. We saw a “law and order” approach that fell flat at making any true leeway. There is hope that the new administration will follow through on promises to reduce crime.
Besides the fact that the U.S. has begun resuming life as normal in many places post-coronavirus, it is clear that there are other factors at play with the rise in crime. The fact is there are too many guns already on the streets, unregistered, and in the wrong hands. Another potential reason for the rise in gun violence could be increased tensions between law enforcement and minority communities. We have seen a rise in police-involved shootings in the past years, and minorities are often on the other end of the officer’s gun. Finally rates of youth unemployment and gang related violence also are contributing to the spike in urban crime.
The Biden Administration has been taking steps to aid in gun control reform. There were four executive orders put forward by President Biden back in April of this year to help get more guns off the streets and out of the wrong hands. On June 23rd, the Biden-Harris Administration announced a comprehensive strategy to prevent and respond to gun crime and ensure public safety. The announcement is partially in response to the fact that in large cities, homicides rose 30% in 2020, and gun assaults rose 8%. The strategy will include using the American Rescue Plan to help state, local, territorial, and tribal governments get funding to put more police officers on the street with proper training. The emphasis is on proper training; with all the police-involved shootings, there have been cries to reform the police for the past several years. Fixing the rise in violence will go hand in hand with better policing across America, though it will take some time. In the plan, there will also be funding for Community Violence Intervention Programs and summer employment opportunities for youth. In addition, the new strategy will take aim at keeping guns out of the wrong hands, using the ATF’s resources to stem the flow of firearms used in crimes, as well as launching firearms trafficking strike forces.
There is fear that with rising temperatures and people beginning to socialize for the first time in over a year, there will likely be an even larger spike in shootings and gun crimes. People were cooped up and away from others in large social gatherings for quite awhile.
With the amount of mass shootings and other forms of violence soaring throughout the nation, many wonder if there will ever be true progress towards reducing the number of violent crimes. While intervention and funding from the federal government is a part of the solution, individual cities must also focus on what they can do to reduce violent crimes in their cities. A potential place to start would be putting more funding to the side for after-school programs, so that our youth have something productive to focus on. Studies show that with a constructive outlet, at-risk youth are less likely to commit crimes. Cities also need to stop defunding their public schools, as this act often disproportionately targets African-American and Hispanic communities; these are the communities already hit hardest by violence. When schools lose funding, they are forced to do things like fire teachers and cut sports or arts programs. This leads to overcrowded classrooms where students cannot get the help they need because staff is so overwhelmed. When kids are disinterested in school and have no opportunities to find hobbies, some kids turn to violence. This includes anything from bullying others and fighting on the playground to more serious crimes, such as sexual assault. While there is no simple solution to the problem, state and local governments must work together with the federal government to figure out what can be done to reduce violent crime across our nation.
Engagement Resources
- To read more about the current administration’s new strategy to reduce gun crimes, click here.
- For information on reducing youth violence, visit this CDC webpage.
- To read the Deputy Attorney General’s memorandum on reducing violent crime, click here.
Who Has Not Been Vaccinated?
Brief # 115 – Technology Policy
Who Has Not Been Vaccinated?
By S. Bhianji
July 5, 2021
Policy Summary
As of June 15, 2021, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stated that nearly 182 million Americans have received at least one dose of a Covid-19 vaccine. Of these 156 million have been fully vaccinated by the two-dose series made by Moderna & Pfizer or the single dose Johnson & Johnson vaccines.
On May 4th, President Biden had set a goal of vaccinating 70% of American adults by July 4th, 2021 and it appears this goal will be accomplished as nearly 67% of adults have already received at least one shot.
Healthcare providers are currently administering just above a million shots a day, but that is a decrease from a peak of 3.8 million two months ago. The key reason for the drop is that there were reports of blood clots in a small number of individuals; this led all states to pause the vaccination program. However, within a week, it was deemed that these blood clots were rare and only affected a handful of people; the vaccination was resumed but this time the population was not rushing to get vaccinated.
Experts indicate that in order to acquire resistance to the virus or reach herd immunity, at least 90% of the population will need to be vaccinated. But there are still millions of adult Americans who refuse to be vaccinated and children still are not eligible for the vaccine.
Policy Analysis
So far no vaccine has been approved for use in children but at the same time millions of Americans refuse to be vaccinated- so whether we will ever achieve herd immunity remains questionable. Further, the pace of vaccination varies across the nation.
Overall, far fewer people living in the Southern and Western states have been vaccinated compared to other states. Some of the reasons cited for low vaccination rates in Southern States include limited access to vaccine sites, ongoing limitations in supplies, very confusing pre-booking procedures to get vaccinated, and hesitancy in getting vaccinated for fear of developing an adverse reaction.
Analysis of vaccine records by the New York Times reveals that overall vaccination rates are much lower in counties/states where the majority of citizens voted to re-elect former President Trump in 2020 or are Republicans.
Sadly even though the Biden administration had sought to ensure that there was even distribution of the vaccine to all states, this has not been the case. More than 6 months since the vaccine roll-out, the vaccination rates are much lower in socially disadvantaged communities than in the rest of America. The majority of the socially disadvantaged communities who remain unvaccinated are in the South, while the exact opposite is seen in the Northeast and Midwest.
Part of the problem with uneven vaccination rates is because the initial vaccine eligibility criteria only included healthcare workers, older Americans, and those with multiple comorbidities. To increase vaccination rates, universal eligibility was recently introduced which includes every citizen above the age of 12.
The CDC has expanded the use of the Pfizer vaccine for use in children over the age of 12; the aim is to get most teenagers vaccinated during the summer so that they are ready to start school in Sept 2021.
One piece of good news is that the death rates from Covid-19 have dropped significantly but the bad news is that nearly all Covid deaths are now seen in unvaccinated Americans.
Engagement Resources
US Coronavirus vaccine tracker. https://usafacts.org/visualizations/covid-vaccine-tracker-states/
See How Vaccinations Are Going in Your County and State. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/covid-19-vaccine-doses.html
Reporting COVID-19 Vaccinations in the United States. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/reporting-vaccinations.html
U.S., U.K. Warn of Ongoing Russian Hacking Efforts
Brief # 53 – Technology Policy
U.S., U.K. Warn of Ongoing Russian Hacking Efforts
By Henry Lenard
July 6, 2021
Policy Summary
U.S. and British government agencies released details on July 1 of an ongoing cybersecurity threat linked to Russia’s military intelligence agency GRU against hundreds of government agencies, energy companies and other organizations worldwide.
The two governments said in a joint advisory on Thursday that Russian spies accused of interfering in the 2016 U.S. presidential election with the hack of the Democratic National Committee had spent much of the past two years abusing virtual private networks to target hundreds of internet sites globally. Those efforts include a similar attempt to disrupt the 2020 presidential election.
The advisory, issued through the U.S. National Security Agency, described the approach used by operatives with ties to the GRU. The Russian attacks involve an amplified and anonymized version of what are known as “brute force” access attempts: The automated spraying of sites with potential passwords until hackers gain access.
The NSA says GRU-linked actors have tried to break into networks using Kubernetes, an open-source tool originally developed by Google to manage cloud services. While a “significant amount” of the attempted break-ins targeted organizations using Microsoft’s Office 365 cloud services, the hackers went after other cloud providers and email servers as well.
The NSA advisory urges companies to adopt and expand cyber protection and mitigation techniques, including the use of multi-factor authentication and mandating strong passwords.
The campaign began in mid-2019 and is “almost certainly” ongoing, the advisory warned. The FBI and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency joined the advisory, as did the British National Cyber Security Centre.
Policy Analysis
The attempt by Russian hackers to penetrate sensitive American and international targets is ongoing and pervasive. The latest advisory from the NSA also shows the involvement of the Russian military intelligence agency in such endeavors.
The password-hacking scheme, most notorious for its interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, has targeted a range of organizations around the globe. The attacks include virtually every sector of interest on the internet, including government and military agencies, defense contractors, political parties and consultancies, logistics companies, energy firms, universities, law firms and media companies. The NSA advisory does not disclose specific targets of the campaign or its presumed purpose.
Through a Facebook post, the Russian Embassy in Washington vehemently denied Russian government involvement in the cyberattacks. “We hope that the American side will abandon the practice of unfounded accusations and focus on professional work with Russian experts to strengthen international information security.”
The U.S. has long accused the Russian government of supporting cyberattacks for espionage, spreading disinformation campaigns, and the disruption of government and key infrastructure.
The GRU has been repeatedly linked by U.S. officials in recent years to a series of hacking incidents. In 2018, special counsel Robert Mueller’s office charged 12 military intelligence officers with hacking Democratic National Committee emails that were then released by WikiLeaks to harm Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign in support of Donald Trump.
An American intelligence assessment earlier this year said the GRU tried to monitor people in U.S. politics in 2019 and 2020 and staged a phishing campaign against subsidiaries of the Ukrainian energy company Burisma, likely to gather information damaging to President Joe Biden, whose son had earlier served on the Burisma board.
An NSA spokesperson said this GRU-led campaign was separate from the SolarWinds supply chain attack, which was attributed to a separate Russian intelligence service known as the SVR. It also differs from the ransomware attacks on Colonial Pipeline and meat supplier JBS, which were targeted by two distinct criminal ransomware groups known to have links to Russia.
The Biden administration in April sanctioned Russia after linking it to election interference and the SolarWinds breach.
In the latter case, Russian military hackers sabotaged a tiny piece of computer code buried in a popular piece of software called SolarWinds. That allowed the hidden virus to spread to 18,000 government and private computer networks when SolarWinds sent out a routine software update.
That gave Russian agents complete access to the digital files of such U.S. departments as Justice, State, Treasury, Energy and Commerce for nine months. During this time, they were able to view top-level government emails, court documents and even nuclear secrets.
Similarly, hacking into businesses gives access to proprietary intellectual property, corporate strategies and competitive information.
All this comes against the backdrop of President Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin agreeing at their June summit that the two countries will start consultations on cybersecurity.
Putin claimed that “most of the cyberattacks in the world are carried out from the cyber realm of the United States,” with Canada and Britain coming second and third.
While the U.S., Canada and Britain all engage in cyberespionage, the most damaging cyberattacks on record have been attributed by the U.S. and the European Union to GRU, including two on Ukraine’s power grid and the 2017 NotPetya virus that caused more than $10 billion in damage globally.
Engagement Resources
NSA cybersecurity statement on Russian threat:
Full NSA advisory:
Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency tips:
https://us-cert.cisa.gov/ncas/tips
UC-Berkeley Information Security Office “Top 10” secure computing tips:
https://security.berkeley.edu/resources/best-practices-how-to-articles/top-10-secure-computing-tips
Biden’s Covid Investigation in China Pt.1
Brief # 120 – Foreign Policy
Biden’s Covid Investigation in China Pt.1
By Erin Meyer
July 2, 2021
Policy Summary
The Biden Administration has asked the intelligence community to investigate the potential Wuhan laboratory leak allegation. President Biden’s statement was clear. “I have now asked the Intelligence Community to redouble their efforts to collect and analyze information that could bring us closer to a definitive conclusion, and to report back to me in 90 days. As part of that report, I have asked for areas of further inquiry that may be required, including specific questions for China.”
China has denied and rebuffed the potential accusation that Covid-19 originated in a laboratory in China. “Smear campaigns and blame shifting are making a comeback, and the conspiracy theory of ‘lab leak’ is resurfacing,” the Chinese embassy in the US released in a statement.
White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan stated that China’s Xi Jinping’s administration would encounter “isolation” in regards to its foreign relations if the country were to resist or deny corroboration to assist the investigation behind the initial outbreak of Covid-19. Sullivan commented that the international and diplomatic stress may play a part in pressuring Beijing to cooperate further. “It is that diplomatic spadework – rallying the nations of the world, imposing political and diplomatic pressure on China, that is a core part of the effort we are undertaking to ultimately face China with a stark choice: either they will allow, in a responsible way, investigators in to do the real work of figuring out where this came from, or they will face isolation in the international community,” Mr Sullivan said.
Policy Analysis
As the Covid-19 outbreak initially began to hit the United States, former President Trump was pushing a separate agenda in regards to the origins of the virus. He and his ilk claimed it originated in a virus lab in Wuhan, where the virus was first documented to have occurred. The rumors escaping the Trump administration didn’t stop there. Trump and his followers also assisted in pushing a bold claim that “coronavirus was a bioweapon created in China.” There has been no evidence to support this claim at this point in time. Nonetheless, these accusations, without proof, were considered an insult by Chinese leadership. Xi Jinping’s administration claimed that the U.S. government was using these theories as a distraction from the failure to contain the outbreak domestically.
US President Joe Biden’s request for a deeper look into the origins of the coronavirus has the potential to significantly disrupt international relations around the world but more specifically between the United States and China. President Biden has recently expressed that a large part of the intelligence community has “coalesced” around the two potential origin points being the possibility of “human contact with an infected animal or from a laboratory accident” however there is not currently enough information to accurately predict which of the two is the true culprit. So why now? President Trump vowed to produce conclusive evidence to prove the origin of the Covid-19 virus but did not. Fast forward to 2021 and it would not be in President Biden’s interest to be perceived as any less resolute.
On July 1st, in celebration of the Chinese Communist Party centenary, President Xi Jinping warned that any country that would challenge China’s objectives “will find their heads bashed bloody against a great wall of steel.” Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo spoke out about Jinping’s comment, claiming the fault lies with President Biden who has been too weak in the face of Chinese’s resistance to assist in the Covid-19 investigation. Pompeo highlighted what he believes is Biden’s resistance to castigate Jinping’s administrations.
The impact on international relations could be devastating. In March of 2020, Chinese government official Lijian Zhao went as far as to estimate that the “US army who brought the epidemic to Wuhan.” The government of China clearly would prefer to be recognized as a nation that overcame the virus locally and not the country responsible for releasing it upon the planet. Internationally, China is trying to paint it’s own image as a culpable, magnanimous world power that is assisting other nations with medical supplies through its mask diplomacy.
Add all of this to the events at the recent G20 meeting. The South China Morning Post wrote of the meeting, “The United States has told the G20 foreign ministers that ‘effective and accountable’ international institutions are needed as Beijing pointedly warned against empty calls for multilateralism and ‘vaccine hoarding’ by richer countries.” As tensions between the two nations rise, how will the Biden administration react?
Engagement Resources
COVID-19 Contact Tracing Communication Toolkit for Health Departments: State and local health department staff can use or adapt these ready-made materials to educate their community about case investigation and contact tracing for COVID-19.
Van Dermyden Makus COVID-19 Investigative Services and Resources – assists clients during the swiftly changing circumstances brought by COVID-19, we have consolidated information related to their services and practices that are directly relevant to current work conditions.
USA.Gov Covid Resources: Learn about the types of assistance the federal government offers people and businesses affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. This includes COVID-19 loans, debt relief, and grants that can help small businesses continue operating and paying their employees. Learn about the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) and other SBA coronavirus relief options for businesses.
____________________________________________________________________________
Take a review on the Biden administration’s progress and updates on the Covid-19 investigation in China. How will this investigation impact diplomacy between the two strong nations?
How Effective Are Our Global Organizations?
Brief # 120 – Foreign Policy
How Effective Are Our Global Organizations?
Part 1 The World Health Organization
By Ailin Goode
June 30, 2021
Policy Summary
As the world continues to struggle with the pandemic and its compounding effects on global inequality, critical eyes have turned to the World Health Organization. Accusations of negligence and political ineptitude against the WHO have gained traction, particularly with the recent appointment of the Syrian government to the Executive Board.
Last year, the Trump administration began the process of withdrawing from the WHO amidst criticism of the way the institution was handling the pandemic. Shortly after President Biden was elected, he reversed this decision and returned the United States to its previous status as one of the most influential and active members in the organization. The administration has noted that cooperation with the WHO does not mean ignoring its shortcomings.
While questions and concerns over China’s influence in the WHO continue and the pandemic threatens the recently reported progress in global health, national and international discourse revolves around the effectiveness of the WHO itself.
Policy Analysis
The World Health Organization was initiated by Brazil and China as part of the development of the United Nations in 1945. Its constitution was ratified in 1948 and it became an internationally recognized global institution. Currently, WHO is made up of 194 member states and has over 8,000 professionals working with the organization.
According to its constitution, “The objective of the World Health Organization shall be the attainment by all peoples of the highest possible level of health.” This objective has been rephrased over the years. The most recent iteration on their website reads, “Dedicated to the well-being of all people and guided by science, the World Health Organization leads and champions global efforts to give everyone, everywhere an equal chance to live a healthy life.” The WHO goes on to define “health” in terms of mental health, physical well-being, and social security.
This objective has led to the creation and adoption by the member states and other organizations of global initiatives like the 8 Millennium Development Goals – the first time-bound set of global health goals adopted by the organization for implementation from 2000-2015 and the follow-up, Sustainable Development Goals, which are set for 2015-2030. There have also been countless smaller campaigns launched in individual countries.
There are many noteworthy criticisms of WHO. There are accusations of statistical manipulation designed to inflate the success of some of their initiatives. The research, data collecting, analysis, and reporting cycle that is used to indicate their progress is mostly internal, or at least conducted in conjunction with other organizations connected with the WHO, so it is difficult to find unbiased information regarding their affairs. There are legitimate concerns of reinforcement of social and gender inequality as well as inadequacies in their response to the climate crises, continued human rights abuses, and global conflict. There is also a recent audit that found WHO staff had broken the organization’s rules in order to award a consulting contract to BCG, including changing the bid criteria as well as working with the firm before receiving formal approval.
These are certainly things that should be addressed and managed. It is worth noting that many of the problems within the WHO are reflections of the problems each of its member countries are currently struggling with. A fact that has been evidenced by global protests, a record-breaking heat wave, and the ongoing struggle between data acquisition, big business, and privacy rights.
There is also statistical evidence of WHO’s success. There was measurable progress made on each of the MDGs. For example WHO just declared China free from Malaria. WHO’s organization of the international response to COVID-19 resulted in multiple tools and resources as well as the recent G7 commitment to dose sharing through their COVAX Facility, a co-led program designed to ensure equitable access to information and vaccines.
Global health has been steadily increasing since the formation of WHO 70 years ago. The exact reasons for this are difficult to determine because of the number of different factors involved. As there continues to be breakthroughs in science, technology, communication, and data acquisition, it makes sense that our understanding of health issues and our ability to address them would also continue to increase.
The effectiveness of WHO lies in the resources and frameworks it provides for the nation states that are able and willing to do the work, such as The ACT Accelerator or its publications that include everything from technical briefings to risk assessment manuals. It creates tools such as the “WHO Benchmarks for International Health Regulations,” to give countries expert-backed, actionable plans to achieve greater “health security.”It offers one of the largest compilations of health data available that isn’t behind an academic or business pay wall, a significant feat in the age of data monetization. It consistently researches and analyzes its own initiatives, compiling publicly available insight into the processes and challenges of everything from providing vaccines to education reform.
WHO is not designed to be a politically minded organization. It is a community of scientists, doctors, and world leaders that was created to facilitate ideas, share information, and develop programs and initiatives designed to benefit everyone. All information sharing, participation, and accountability is voluntary on the part of each member state. This means that the strength and success of the organization is the responsibility of every country. WHO is and will be as effective as its member states are cooperative.
Engagement Resources
Pan American Health Organization – COVID-19 Situation Reports
Volunteer Match – Volunteer opportunities to help fight COVID-19
U.S. Inaction as Conflict in Ethiopia Worsens
Brief # 119 – Foreign Policy
U.S. Inaction as Conflict in Ethiopia Worsens
By Avery Roe
June 28, 2021
Policy Summary
The conflict in the Tigray region of Ethiopia has not received much attention in the United States but is increasingly raising international concerns over the atrocities taking place. In November 2020, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed launched a “law-and-order operation” supposedly to target domestic terrorists, but the operation has involved large-scale deployments of the National Defense Forces, aerial bombardments, and involvement of Eritrean forces, signifying a larger scale target of the Tigrayan leadership. This fighting has led to thousands of deaths and countless injuries, many due to the indiscriminate shelling of cities and other human rights abuses by the National Forces.
Since the launch of the operation over 60,000 refugees have fled the area as a result of the violence committed by the National Defense Forces, which gives the conflict regional implications as neighboring counties deal with the displaced peoples. Critical infrastructure has been destroyed and there have been reports of large-scale human rights abuses, raising concerns of genocide. Very few believe that the, already delayed, upcoming national elections will be free or fair, with the operations of key opposition parties severely curtailed.
The conflict became more complicated earlier this week when the Ethiopian Government called for a unilateral ceasefire for several months after the Tigrayan fighters retook the regional capital of Mekelle. Tigrayan leadership rejected the ceasefire. The stated goal of the Tigrayan forces at this point is a complete withdraw of Ethiopian and Eritrean troops from the region. The retaking of Mekelle also came with a near communications blackout, the cause of which is unclear.
After assuming the Presidency, Joe Biden has taken a more active role in dealing with the conflict, especially when compared to his predecessor. In a recent statement, the administration noted that; “The large-scale human rights abuses taking place in Tigray…are unacceptable and must end.” The administration has committed $305 million in funding for humanitarian relief efforts. United States UN Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield has helped raise the profile of the conflict at the United Nations and a Special US Envoy has traveled to Ethiopia. In addition to this, the aid to Ethiopia withheld by the Trump administration over a disputed dam with Egypt will continue to be withheld because of the Tigray crisis.
Policy Analysis
While the Biden administration has taken steps to try to deal with the conflict, this largely seems to be following the general American pattern of ignoring atrocities in Africa. As the United States works to re-engage on an international stage this is an incredible opportunity to work with newly re-affirmed allies to pressure Prime Minister Ahmed into ceasing hostilities and working towards healing in the region. The United States’ diplomatic strategy thus far is not working and Tigrayans and those throughout the horn of Africa need to see a broader US involvement.
The continuation of the withholding of aid is the strongest step President Biden has taken, but it is significantly weakened by the fact that it is nothing new and was initially implemented by the Trump administration for a different reason. President Biden needs to take a strong stand with aid in a new way that is directly tied to the conflict. The United States can send a message that the conflict will not be tolerated and save lives in the process.
Especially in light of the most recent developments, The US also needs to place far more pressure on Eritrea to remove its troops from the region. At this point, they are only serving to flare up the conflict and the goal needs to be for tensions to settle and a viable solution to be reached. Senate Resolution 97 that called for the withdraw of Eritrean troops and condemned the human rights abuses clearly was not enough, The United States needs to exert more pressure on both Eritrea and Ethiopia to withdraw so that a solution can be agreed upon.
Engagement Resources
- https://twitter.com/zekuzelalem?lang=en- Zecharias Zelalem is a reporter on the ground in Tigray and shares updates on his Twitter feed.
- https://www.rescue.org/country/ethiopia?gclid=CjwKCAjww-CGBhALEiwAQzWxOu1CTC8NyHWHzuL5dtABfKMcXhAW6c8rfJ2R4eP79ZoHVqsq2Myg_BoCjkoQAvD_BwE- The International Rescue Committee is doing significant work in assisting the Ethiopian Refugees.