JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
How Effective Are Our Global Organizations?
Brief #125 – Foreign Policy
By Ailín Goode
The United States has been an active member of the World Trade Organization (WTO) since its creation in January 1995. As of 2019, the U.S. had been a party in 179 cases managed using WTO dispute settlement procedures. It remains active in the creation and maintenance of the agreements set for by WTO to organize and govern world trade.
Star Wars: The Weaponization of Space
Brief #60 – Technology
By Henry Lenard
Even as space commerce soars to new heights, it appears the world continues to gird itself for the inevitability of warfare in the heavens. At the official opening of the new UK Space Command on July 30, two top British military officers directly criticized China and Russia for their “reckless” behavior in space, such as using weapons to destroy satellites. That activity has left a trail of dangerous space debris in Earth’s orbit.
The two commanders also left open the possibility that the UK could develop its own weapons to defend assets in space for the first time.
Are We Going to Need Booster Shots of the Covid Vaccine?
Brief # 121 – Health and Gender
By S Bhimji
There is no longer any question about the efficacy of Covid vaccines. Most studies indicate that they prevent severe disease, hospitalization and death. However, breakthrough infections are being reported with a higher frequency. A few months ago, there were only a few sporadic reports but now it appears the numbers are rising.
An Update on Efforts to Reform the Police
Brief #21 – Social Justice
By Erika Shannon
Statistics show that black people are three times more likely to be killed by police than white people, which is why police reform and rebuilding trust between law enforcement and minorities is so important in today’s climate. Local leaders have proposed using the funds to expand law enforcement, invest in social services, or develop technology used to prevent gun violence.
Space Tourism Puts Focus Back on Commercialization of the Outer Limits
Brief #59 – Technology
By Henry Lenard
The successful space tourism flights of Richard Branson aboard his Virgin Galactic craft and Jeff Bezos on his Blue Origin rocket have drawn new attention to what is happening in the skies above us. It also has many asking the question who has oversight of commercial ventures in space.
US Makes Vaccine Available to Overseas Visitors
Brief #120 – Health and Gender
By S. Bhimji
Because of the high cost of healthcare in the USA, for much of the past 20 years, many Americans have sought medical care abroad going as far as India for heart surgery, Thailand for massage therapy, to Israel for liposuction, and so on. In addition, many Americans have undergone cosmetic and weight loss surgery in Central American countries and Europe. The cost of healthcare in these nations is only a fraction of what it would cost in the USA.
Spyware Technology: A Global Threat top Democracy and Human Rights
Brief #58 – Technology Policy
By Scout Burchill
A flurry of articles have recently been published on the Israeli based cyber-surveillance company NSO Group thanks to a recent leak exposed by Forbidden Stories, a collaborative non-profit journalist organization, which revealed a list of about 50,000 phone numbers alleged to have been targeted by the company’s Pegasus surveillance software.
Global Perspectives: Nigeria: A Case Study In The Slow Creep of Digital Authoritarianism
Brief #57 – Technology
By Scout Burchill
On June 4th, the Nigerian government announced an “indefinite suspension” of Twitter after the social media company deleted a controversial tweet by Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari. The Nigerian government’s Twitter ban and its recent history of attempts to more stringently regulate online speech present a cautionary tale about the rise of digital authoritarianism.
Moving Forward After U.S. Withdrawal in Afghanistan
Brief # 125 – Foreign Policy
By Avery Roe
Despite widespread criticism, The Biden Administration has restated its commitment that the United States military mission in Afghanistan will conclude on August 31st. This comes after the Trump Administration made an agreement with the Taliban to remove all American forces by May 1, 2021, a large part of the stated rationale for President Biden’s decision.
A New Wave of “Anti – Protest” and “Anti – Riot” Bills Threaten First Amendment Rights In The United States
Title: Civil Rights; A New Wave of “Anti – Protest” and “Anti – Riot” Bills Threaten First Amendment Rights In The United States; April 2021
Policy Summary: During the 2021 legislative session “anti – protest” and “anti – riot” bills have been introduced in a number of states across the United States. The bills vary in a number of key features but it is clear that these bills are being put forward in response to the protests last year against police misconduct and institutional racism. There have been more than 80 anti – protest bills introduced this year alone. Here is a list of the most noteworthy of those state bills.
On April 19, 2021 in Florida, Governor Ron DeSantis (R) signed the Combatting Public Disorder Act. That act creates a new charge of “aggravated rioting” which is focused on acts committed during a declared riot such as blocking a highway or the threat of force against a bystander. The bill also enhances the penalties for battery and burglary charges during a riot. Additionally, a mandatory sentence can be imposed on a person convicted of battery against a police officer during a riot.
In Texas, Senate Bill 92 proposes that if a group of seven or more people causes property damage that all members of the group of people can be held liable for the property damage even if a person did not intend to cause or actually cause the damage.
In the Minnesota State Senate, SF 2381 proposes that anyone convicted of an unlawful protest violation would become ineligible from receiving student loans and state financial assistance aid such as state unemployment benefits.
Indiana Senate Bill 34 proposes that any person convicted of unlawful assembly would be barred from working in a state or local government position.
In Oklahoma, State House Bill 1674 proposes to offer civil and criminal protections to drivers who hit with their vehicles protestors who are blocking a roadway. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE
Policy Analysis: Anti – protest and anti – riot bills have experienced a surge in the last few years. The current batch of bills from the 2021 legislative sessions have come in the wake of incidents where people have protested against police misconduct and racially motivated incidents against minority communities but they have also been tried in other scenarios. In response to protests against the Keystone XL pipeline a number of states proposed bills that sought to penalize those who protested against the pipeline. A rationale often used for these bills against environmental protestors is for a need to protect the oil and gas industry. With these new anti – protest and anti – riot bills a similar rationale is being used in that there is a need to protect law enforcement, historical monuments and property. But in their attempt to make these bills about protection of life and property these politicians are ignoring the constitutional concerns that these bills are running up against.
The common problem running through nearly all of these bills are that they run afoul of the First Amendment’s protections against abridging the freedom of speech and the right to peaceably assemble. Taking the right to freedom of speech, what a number of these bills would do is that they would “chill” a person’s right to protest which is a recognized form of speech. People would be much more hesitant to engage in a protest on an important public issue if there are unrelated consequences for attending a protest. A person can find himself or herself disqualified for educational loans and unemployment benefits. So instead of risking those benefits they may decide that speaking up might not be worth it. They can find themselves disqualified from holding a government position in the future. And they can also find themselves civilly liable for thousands of dollars of property damage when they may in fact not have intended or participated in destruction of property. The message being sent is that speaking up and voicing an opinion is not worth the time and effort. This a horrible message to send as the exchange of ideas and speaking freely is a valued American tradition. States should be encouraging speech and the exchange of ideas instead of enacting restrictions that stifle the exercise of speech or enacting protections for those that seek to physically harm protestors (no liability if a driver rams a protestor with his car) as many of these bills do.
Another common thread to these new bills is that they are directed at controlling the violent and destructive elements that, unfortunately, have become associated with protests. However, the U.S. Crisis Monitor examined data from 2020 and found that of the 7,750 protests from the summer of 2020, 93% were neither violent nor destructive. Of course, there were incidents of property damage at a number of protests but protests have not been overwhelmingly violent or destructive as these bills claim. The threat of violence or destruction is being put forth as a looming threat ready to explode when that is not the case at all. The bills are more likely trying to diminish the messages of protestors by painting them as something they are not – destructive and violent – in the hopes that the rest of the citizenry will side against the protestors without examining the merits of their message.
While Florida’s bill has already been enacted into law, the anti – protest and anti – riot bills in other states should be closely scrutinized for the effects that may have on the rights being exercised under the First Amendment by those who are marching in the streets to voice their concerns. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources:
International Center for Non – Profit Law – infopage tracking progress of anti – protest bills around U.S.
First Amendment Watch – infopage with analysis and news of anti – protest bills.
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.
Student Loan Forgiveness: Who Should Benefit and By How Much?
Brief #115
Student Loan Forgiveness: Who Should Benefit and By How Much?
Rosalind Gottfried
April 25, 2021
Policy
Americans owe 1.7 trillion dollars in student debt. This figure represents an increase of 102% from 2010. The issue is seen by many as one of racial and economic equity. This is because the greatest portion of student debt accrues to lower and middle income students and to students who are Latinx , African American and/or women. Twenty five percent of African Americans and twenty percent of Hispanic Americans are behind in their debt payments. Students of color are also more likely than other bearers of student loans to have left school without a degree or to have jobs where their pay is not commensurate with the average college graduate’s pay scale.
President Biden’s recent corona virus relief bill provided for a moratorium on loan payments until September 30, 2021 and exempted them from accruing interest during that time period. He has also exempted debt forgiveness or cancellation from being taxed. At the same time, a recent US Court of Appeals ruling has made it more difficult to excuse student loans if a person declares bankruptcy. This would not impact a one-time loan cancellation but applies to people making payments on existing loans which would not be canceled under a new guideline.
Candidate Biden attacked the issue of student loan with some vigor but his current positions appear less vehement. There is also a question of whether he has the authority to forgive loans through executive mandate or whether he will go with a congressional strategy. He has asked for a memo clarifying his authority to address the loan issue through executive order and there are some signs that he might favor a Congressional approach, though the likelihood of gaining support in each House seems unlikely.
The more specific issues are in regard to how much might be excused and who, or what, loans would be included. There are resolutions proffered by Democrats in the House and Senate to forgive up to $50,000 in federal student loan debt. The Senate Bill, promoted by Senators Elizabeth Warren and Chuck Schumer, would forgive up to $50,000 in federal student loans for individuals making less than $125,000 annually. Two hundred civil right and consumer protection groups support this effort. This would eliminate the debt of 36 million people of the 45 million loan holders. Biden currently seems more likely to go with a figure of $10,000 in federal student loans wiping out the debt of 15 million borrowers.
Analysis
One large rationale for loan forgiveness addresses the myriad ways in which such an action would bolster the economy. These include:
- Reducing the wealth gap
- Providing an economic stimulus to the middle class
- Promoting home purchases
- Increasing the development of small businesses
- Increasing the ability to save for retirement
- Supporting the desire of young people to start a family
The conditions to qualify for the full loan forgiveness are controversial but likely will have an income limit and apply to students who attended public colleges and universities. The feeling is that students who have attended more elite universities have not accrued much loan debt and, if they did, are more likely to be among the higher earners which could pay back their loans. Critics of loan forgiveness assert that higher income earners are likely to gain the most from loan forgiveness though there is little evidence to support this. The cost of higher education has indisputably outpaced family income, representing an incomprehensible portion of assets; it is hard to argue against the idea of loan forgiveness. Many economists agree that what stimulates an economy most, over the longer term, is a healthy, solvent middle class and eliminating, or at least reducing, student debt certainly would improve the outlook for many young people.
Learn More References
https://afro.com/democrats-pressure-biden-to-address-student-loan-debt-crisis/
Engagement Resources
# 5 Fishing Boat Dispatch
Changing Tides : A new blog post on the marine environment written by U.S. RESIST NEWS Reporter Katherine Cart
# 5 Fishing Boat Dispatch
April 22,2021
Prince William Sound is a quiet place. Storms in the Gulf of Alaska die on the western edges of islands; Montague, Hitchinbrook and Hawkins Islands rise like barbicans about the calm inlets. When one flies low over the Sound, little islands appear as shadows stretched westward: storm waves crush beaches from craggy outcrop. On the leeward side rise unblunted cliffs. At the scooped back of the Sound, one can, in most seasons, drive aluminum skiffs for miles on flat water, jigging for halibut and pulling from 30 fathoms by hand shrimp pots in which an octopus is more likely to be found than shrimp. Treed mountains rise up from the water, are striated by waterfall from glacial seeps, summits. In winter, the bays beneath slush are aquamarine, incredibly clear – the season of rot not yet begun – and the hills are stilled beneath a fathom of snow. The winter nights are long: sun up and down occur near the middle of the working day. In clear dawns and twilights, if one stands in view of the sweep of the Sound, all the snowed islands blaze in alpenglow. On Esther Island, where storms rarely come, the winter sun flits around the periphery of the bay, slinking behind mountain ridge. There is a small cluster of buildings on Esther Island, in which a dozen or so people live and work, hatching and releasing Chum salmon[1] by the millions each year. In the darkest months, daylight is the blued shadow of the mountain across the bay, and night is, with clear skies and luck, the greenish aurora borealis beyond the humped blocks of snowed peaks. Strong moons reflect silver on frozen waterfalls.
I first arrived to Esther Island in a February snow squall. Nothing moved for months, save the ravens and the flitting Coho the birds picked from our raceways[2]. April then opened spring in one day: at the western hem of sinking snow fields, in a juniper copse, a small grey spider had hung her web across the ice. The next morning, I heard the first returning gulls, raucous, self-assured; stoneflies swarmed low over the snow. Life and death are in slow riot in the Sound.
If you spend a winter on Esther Island, you’ll mark time by snow melt, sun’s shift, the budding swells of Chum salmon runs[3]. At the hatchery, we were especially attuned to the return of the anadromous fish; spawning salmon run midsummer, when only the distant Chugach Range still holds snow. After a half decade meandering the Pacific, Chum salmon school en masse in the sheltered bay. Their silvering begins to revert to juvenile colors: mauve, subdued green, sometimes a dull, deep plum. Dorsums of bucks hump up, preparing the endoskeleton for the implausible push up snowmelt, into a fresh water that will, eventually, rot them. Hens fatten, carrying roe like jewels[4]. Chum salmon are often dubbed dog salmon. If you hold a spawning fish and look her in the bland face, the epithet will be no mystery: once demure teeth now grow to snarls and will rip a palm if one isn’t careful. Their collective return to the fresh flush in which they were once yolked hatchlings to dig their own redds[5], lay and fertilize eggs is still a profound mystery. Clear bay water goes black with Chum and hazy with decay; spawned out salmon float dead on the tide. Bucks and hens amass in the hatchery brood pond – a cement hollow through which fresh lake water is funneled, simulating a river. Spawning salmon push up contrived cement steps, jumping against surging water. The feat appears desperate, hysterical, incredible.
From the brood pond, up fifty feet coastwise, a river floods from the same lake the brood pond water is pumped. This small river (you can jump the highest rocks at low tide) has long played host to spawning salmon; eons before the hatchery was erected, before humans populated Alaskan coasts, wild salmon returned each year to lay broods in river beds like these. It was from those native fish that the island hatchery first collected spawning returners for manual propagation. In the bay, wild fish are now far outnumbered by hatchery-bred fish. A few salmon make it past the more alluringly powerful, synthesized current to this river. They may be wild fish whose progenitors too spawned freely in riverbed, or they may be of the hatchery stock. No matter which runnel the fish happen upon, none will return to sea. By the hundreds of thousands they push shoreword. Spawning in the lake water in which they were themselves hatched will be their final pilgrimage.
The seasons on Esther are also marked, though by a lesser token, with the arrival of salmon seiners, gillnetters and tenders. The boats’ materialization, like that of the black bears, of the gulls and bald eagles who feed upon the spent carcasses of spawned fish, is contingent upon the salmon’s continuation. When spawning salmon run to fresh water across the world – as in Prince William Sound – many are netted by fishing vessels before reaching either the brood pond or river bed. This can be, like any fishery, a lucrative business subject to the variability of harvesting wild produce. To protect livelihood and broad economy, hatcheries manually spawn commercially viable fish. Salmon fishermen are threads in the Alaskan coastal financial ecosystem pulsing money to interior stretches. Take, for example, one 38-foot purse-seiner, crewed by five people. This boat nets fish (with an absurd amount of skill required by crew and captain; maneuvering skiff, boat and net through shallow, vessel-jammed water necessitates mechanical and physical dexterity and an insensible stamina.) and the hauls the fish to offload at a waiting tender[6]. Once full, or the opener[7] closes, the tender transports the fish to processor facilities – canneries, reefer trucks, factories. From there, fish is sent and sold throughout the world, supplying grocers, fish counters, food processors, families. Each of these steps (and all those unmentioned – can producers, truck drivers, marine gear suppliers, etc) boosts a massive economic feedback loop.
The season of spawning is called “egg-take.” From the brood pond Chum are sent by conveyor into the main hatchery building. Ripe hens are cut ventrally, roe scraped by thumb and forefinger from ovaries, collected in five gallon buckets. White milt from five bucks is sprayed by hand into the bucket, simulating somewhat the competitive diversity of stream-spawned fish. Over the long, silent winter, these fertilized eggs are coddled in incubators. In the early spring, fry[8] are released into the bay to school in nets. Their concept of the world is maximized from a four-by-four-by-one foot aluminum tank to a thirty-by-thirty-by-twenty foot net. Here they are fed a regulated diet of dried feed chucked generally by a bored technician walking in floating circles. In a few months, the snow melts on moss, spiders uncase, birds return and the smolts[9] are released: their world, very suddenly, becomes the spread of the globe’s oceans. Humpbacks arrive to feed on hatchery fish. Their spouts can be heard across the bay, and the sight of the first is announced on the island with great fanfare. A brief hiatus in bay activity follows. Hatchery workers rest, prepare. And then the next Chum brood returns just ahead of the sea lions, scavenging eagles and the engine thrum of gillnetters and seiners from Cordova and Whittier and Valdez. Egg-take, commercial fishing and summer, begin again.
There are many such hatcheries poised at the world’s littoral edges. They support all manner of fish – though the general commonality is the matter of the fish’s economic import. It’s a sticky situation, providing solutions that raise questions. Hatchery-raised fish (as opposed to those spawning wild in riverbed without the help of human hand), in the Pacific Northwest, make up a mind-boggling 70-80% of coastal fishery stocks. In Prince William Sound, the hatchery system managed by the non-profit I once worked for supported each year $49 million dollars – 90 million pounds – of commercially harvested salmon.
Beyond financial impacts, of course, hatchery fish fill potential gaps caused by overfishing. Overfishing can happen inadvertently and outside prescribed openers; on Bering Sea commercial pollock boats fishing a hundred miles offshore, salmon-takes are of large concern. Salmon cannot legally be kept for sale by offshore vessels, and the catch-limits for Chinook and Coho salmon[10] are restrictively low (and regulated in a system similar to that of halibut limits, discussed here). Industrial inland practices can impact native salmon runs too, raising cause for hatchery support. On the east coast, numbers of wild Atlantic salmon are dumbfoundingly low. The logging, damming and industrial waste that revert long-stable spawning rivers to inhabitable washes, compounded by early unregulated fishing offshore razed Atlantic salmon populations. Atlantic hatcheries now work to boost runs. As coastal money moves in veins by trade and transport inland, salmon move nutrients in heaps, from benthos to estuary. And from river banks fertilized by spawned-out fish unfold ecosystems. There is merit to hatchery-fish beyond the financial.
There are, regrettably, repercussions to muddling long-held ecological patterns – even for reparations’ sake. Pruning of genetics and unsupportable behavioral traits begins in the Chum-spawned river bed. Most individuals making it into the hatchery brood pond have a fair chance to be manually spawned at the hands of a hatchery tech. Not so in the wild; if the journey upriver to spawning grounds is long (I worked once at a Sockeye hatchery 200 miles inland, to which fish arrived alive, but rotting) a very select few will make the push. Wild alvein[11] are subjected to major run-off events, predation, disease. Inside the hatchery, alvein in incubators have daily their O2 levels tested, temperature maintained, are protected within four aluminum walls. The imbalance in necessary hardiness between hatchery and wild salmon continues until smolt release. There is a relative lack of predator awareness, hunting capabilities and overall lower socio-behavioral fitness in hatchery-raised fish. Hatchery-raised and wild-spawned fish do eventually mix at sea, and, during fishing openers, are caught in the same gillnets and purse seins. Concern amongst fisheries researchers now grows: in today’s overtaxed oceans, many salmon stocks are listed as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act. Because hatcheries allow for greater fishing efforts on returning salmon, and because the proportion of hatchery-raised salmon now far outweighs that of the wild-spawned, fishing’s impact on wild-spawned salmon numbers is disproportionately larger than on hatchery-raised. A growing proportion of the less-fit hatchery-raised fish will necessitate more hatchery-fish raised (as the entirety of the salmon population grows, over generations, less-fit). It is a brutal cycle, that at the time of the first hatchery’s development, was unpredictable.
Is there a balance to be found between boosting the volume of native salmon returns and protecting their genetic history? The conundrum lies, as it so often seems to, between hedging industry and the lives supported therein, and sustaining ecological balance. The line between the two, however, grows thinner as one looks further ahead.
Obtusely, yes, hatchery-raised fish boost native populations. It is in the fine-print that the worry niggles: will the less-competitive nature of hatchery fish in turn lessen the subsequent generations of wild fish? A collective appraisal on recent anadromous fish studies can be found here, if you have the interest. Ecosystem evolution is the infinite game. Our practical solutions heretofore have been bandaid-slaps: a child’s answer to the growing sore. Which is not to say that the search for sustainable practices is obsolete. As the bay’s many lives adapt in flux, we too, must evolve regulatory standards when confronted by change and changing perception. Let us reject the notion that holds the sustaining of livelihood and protection of long-term ecological health to be mutually exclusive aims.
[1] Chum salmon: A relatively abundant commercially harvested salmon. Typically used for low-value products (e.g. dog kibble,supplements). The flesh composition is less refined for serving as fillets than other salmon.
[2] Raceways: long, deep tanks in which juvenile fish mature.
[3] Salmon runs: the mass return of a certain year of fish from several years at sea to fresh water in which they will spawn.
[4] Buck: spawning male salmon; Hen: spawning female salmon.
[5] Redds: a hollow dug by female salmon at the bottom of a river bed in which she lays eggs. Bucks fertilize with milt.
[6] Tender: A commercial vessel with large storage capabilities that collects fish from multiple fishing vessels and transports to land en masse.
[7] Opener: a state or federally-determined allotment of time and area in which fishing can occur. For salmon seiners and gillnetters, this may be a 12-36 hour window, in which boats fish with graceful hysteria, laying and pursing nets within inches of each other.
[8] Fry: Newly hatched, impossibly delicate juvenile fish.
[9] Smolt: Young anadromous fish, recently silvered moving from nears-shore, brackish water to sea for the first time.
[10] Chinook and Coho Salmon: depending on your preferences, these can be considered some of the tastiest salmon fillets to be had. Commercially, they have a much greater worth, and are much rarer than Chum salmon. (Personally, I prefer Sockeye.)
[11] Alvein: the youngest stage of fish, directly after hatching, and before fry-stage. Alvein continue to mature in substrate, be it plastic incubator gravel or river bed.
Defendant Trump: A Review of Outstanding Charges
U.S. RESIST NEWS BLOG POST
Defendant Trump: A Review of Outstanding Charges
By Sean Gray
April 25,2021
Donald Trump has been a defendant in some 3,500 lawsuits
Post-presidential life promises little relief from the civil, and potentially criminal litigation. Whilst occupying the White House, Trump was able to weaponize the Justice Department to insulate him from trouble. Those protections are gone, and many chickens may be coming home to roost.The Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel holds that indicting a sitting president would unconstitutionally undermine his ability to execute his duties. That is no longer at issue, and private citizen Trump has no further pretense for refusing to comply with the subpoenas.
Jan. 6th’s failed coup is indeed a day that will live in infamy. It may cost Trump a day in court. That the then-sitting president incited the mob and did nothing meaningful to discourage the mayhem, there can be not doubt. Whether he is civilly responsible for the ensuing fallout will be determined in a Washington federal court. Capitol police officers, Sidney Hemby and James Blassingame, are each seeking in excess of $75,000 in compensatory damages from Trump for his role in the insurrection. The complaint outlines the public timeline of Trump’s behavior on 1/6 through the context of the pair’s ordeal. Both were assaulted repeatedly by rioters spurred on by ‘’The Big Lie’’. Blassingame sustained head and neck injuries and is said to experience symptoms associated with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Hemby suffered similar injuries and is currently undergoing physical therapy three days a week. Both are on medical leave from their posts. In tying the president to the conduct of his supporters, the lawsuit notes that while Blassingame was under attack by a violent mob, one of his assailants informed him ‘’we were invited by the president.’’ Additionally, 40% of phones tracked near the national mall (the site of Trump’s pre-riot speech), were also found at the capitol at the time it was under siege. Those people heard Trump’s unambiguous call to action, and took him up on it. The 35-page complaint draws a compelling line between Trump’s conduct and the misfortunate the befall the two officers.
Trump has a long history of defaulting of debts owed. His presidential campaign has proved no exception, owing over a million dollars to a dozen American cities where he held rallies. The expenses mostly stem from additional securities and use of municipal facilities for campaign events. Though no binding agreements were signed, it is generally understood that the cost of political rallies will not be passed on to the taxpayers of the host city. Chalk it up to another norm ignored. The mayor of Albuquerque, New Mexico announced on Thursday that the city has sent the $211,000 bill the campaign owes the city to a collection agency. Cities have been deterred from pursuing the matter in court as a favorable judgement would likely be exceeded in the cost to obtain one.
Former Attorney General Bill Barr attempted to substitute the US government in Trump’s place as a defendant in a defamation suit from former Elle magazine columnist, E. Jean Carroll. He failed, and now the lawsuit is slated to proceed. Carroll alleges Trump raped her in a New York City Department store in the mid-1990’s. In denying the allegation, Trump insulted her appearance, character and called her a liar. Carroll was subsequently inundated with hate mail which she claims led to her firing from a position she had held for nearly thirty years. The statute of limitations on the assault has expired. Carroll is seeking damages for defamation and a retraction by Trump. A preponderance of evidence will be a difficult bar to clear. Apart from convincing a jury that her rape allegation is factual, Carroll must demonstrate that it led to her removal from her post.
Trump faces an eerily similar lawsuit from former Apprentice contestant, Summer Zervos. All told, over two dozen women have come forth with claims of sexual impropriety against the former president. The number of disclosures could prove damaging to Trump’s already less than sterling public image.
Fraud has always been an internal part of Trump’s business dealings. Targeting vulnerable investors in a pyramid scheme is par for the course. It is the crux of a lawsuit against Trump for promoting ‘’multi-level marketing company’’ (MLM). Per the FTC, ‘’99% of individuals who invest in MLM’s lose money. That did not prevent Trump from accepting hefty sums and lending his full throated endorsement to the company, its products and its business model. While Trump was merely a spokesperson for the rouse, his appearances coincided with his time hosting The Apprentice; his name was near synonymous with opulence and prosperity. This, the four psedonounymous plaintiffs allege in the class-action suit, is what motivated them to invest money they could ill-afford to lose.
Donald Trump has also likely civil and committed criminal violations related to his business for which he could stand trial. Michael Cohen, in testimony before Congress, outlined various instances of illegal business activity during his decade of employment in the Trump organization. Trump’s tax returns are a key piece of evidence in the prosecution of several ongoing cases. The battle between Trump and the Manhattan DA’s office over his taxes has dragged on for years. A landmark Supreme Court decision cleared the way for the release of Trump’s taxes and other documents related to his business dealings as a private citizen. Former Trump lawyer,
A charge of solicitation to commit election fraud is a possibility for Trump in Georgia. As part of his attempt to overturn the 2020 election, Trump enlisted the aid of Georgia Secretary of State, Brad Raffensberger. In an hour long phone call (publicly available), Trump is heard pressuring the state official to ‘’find the 11,780 votes’’ that cost him the Peach State. Per federal statute, it was clearly an attempt to solicit election fraud.
Donald Trump is a scofflaw who has seldom been made to face serious consequences. His post-presidential life threatens to put that streak to the test. The mountain of legal woes he faces would be insurmountable for most, but his considerable resources and influence make him a formidable opponent to all challengers.
New Top Dogs, Same Old Tricks: Uncovering the Power of Big Tech, Part 1 Washington’s Biggest Influencers
Technology Brief #44
New Top Dogs, Same Old Tricks: Uncovering the Power of Big Tech,
Part 1
Washington’s Biggest Influencers
By Scout Burchill
April 24, 2021
Summary:
Move over Big Oil and Big Tobacco. According to a new report by Public Citizen, Big Tech companies now run the largest lobbying operations in Washington. For the first time ever, Facebook and Amazon topped the 2020 list of individual corporate lobbying spenders. Facebook spent close to $20 million and Amazon was not far behind spending close to $19 million, about 30% more than Comcast Corporation, the third highest spender. Since 2018, Amazon and Facebook have increased their spending by 30% and 56%, respectively.
These sums only represent reported federal lobbying dollars. Additional spending to gain influence through campaign contributions, Super Pacs, advertising campaigns, research funding, non-profits, associations, federations or trade groups, as well as state, local and international political spending are not included. Taking reported campaign contributions into account, Amazon and Facebook spent a combined $124 million in lobbying and campaign contributions during the 2020 election cycle alone.
These figures barely scratch the surface of what Big Tech companies are spending to influence and capture the Washington political establishment.
Eclipsing the titans of yesteryears, Big Oil and Big Tobacco, Big Tech spent close to twice as much as Exxon and Philip Morris and outspent every telecom conglomerate and defense giant in Washington. This is a dramatic turn of events from less than a decade ago when Big Tech companies barely made these lists.
Google is the exception, having been in the top 10 since 2012. Their decision to significantly cut lobbying in 2019 as part of a planned “corporate restructuring” program came as antitrust criticism grew and the DOJ prepared their investigation. It is unclear how Google’s restructuring plans have affected their influence campaigns.
Analysis:
These figures are important signifiers of the striking shifts in power and economic might that have taken place in the U.S. economy over the past decade. Traditionally, well-known heavyweights like defense contractors, the oil and gas industry, the financial industry and the telecommunications conglomerates tend to top the list. While these industries certainly still shell out plenty of dollars, Public Citizen’s report confirms the presence of the newest top dogs in town. Although these figures may seem large, they barely scratch the surface of Big Tech’s well oiled influence machine.
Take Amazon as an example. Amazon runs an incredibly sophisticated influence campaign, in which lobbying dollars and campaign contributions make up only the tip of the iceberg. For one, Jeff Bezos owns the Washington Post, one of the largest newspapers in the United States with significant sway in D.C. politics. Further consolidating his grip on the media, he has also become a member of the Gridiron Club, one of the oldest and most prestigious journalistic organizations in Washington D.C., wherein journalists cozy up to the same political officials they are supposed to be critical of in their coverage.
Bezos’ D.C. clout does not end there. Bezos also owns the biggest house in Washington D.C., a former museum spanning 27,000 square feet and outfitted with over 20 bathrooms, which he uses to host lavish parties and schmooze with the Washington political and cultural elite. His megamansion is a stone’s throw away from where Amazon’s second corporate headquarters are set to be established in Crystal City, Virginia. HQ2, as it is called, will undoubtedly help facilitate closer relations between the company and the D.C. establishment.
Amazon has already earned billions of dollars in federal contracts with its Web Services division, and only narrowly missed out on a $10 billion dollar deal with the Pentagon after former President Trump snubbed Amazon for Microsoft. Not to mention, by placing HQ2 in the Arlington suburbs, Bezos has effectively enriched countless bureaucrats by boosting the local economy and further spiking property values. Keep in mind, this is only a snapshot of Amazon’s influence efforts in the metro D.C. area. Nonetheless, it makes Facebook’s $20 million in lobbying look like small peanuts.
The insidious and anti-democratic influence of money in politics is a well trodden topic in today’s political discussions. Despite this, it is worth reiterating just how powerful corporate and moneyed interests are in modern American democracy. A newly published study by the political reform group Issue One sheds light on this concentration of power. According to their findings, 1 in every 13 dollars dollars spent on federal election campaigns since 2009 has come from exactly 12 donors. Whether or not the candidates this type of money tends to pool behind are successful (think Bloomberg’s disastrous run) the effect of this concentration of power on the political process is tangible and real.
In 2014, Martin Gilens from Princeton University and Benjamin Page from Northwestern University published a seminal study asking the basic question of who governs the United States. Analyzing data from over 1,700 areas of policy between the years 1981 and 2002, they found that, “the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.” The preferences of powerful business organizations and a small number of affluent Americans, however, were found to be highly influential in policy making in the United States. So the next time Mark Zuckerburg calls for new internet regulations to address the harms of Big Tech, which he has done multiple times, including in the Opinion Section of the Washington Post, think of this study and take a moment to consider who will be helping write those regulations.
There is one final point worth mentioning about Amazon and Facebook’s meteoric rise in political spending. It is likely not a coincidence that Big Tech has reached the zenith of its spending powers at the same time unprecedented amounts of scrutiny and criticism, from both the public and elected officials, are being lobbed their way. Facebook is now one of the most hated companies in America, and their 56% jump in political spending since 2018 reflects this new reality.
Despite marketing themselves as allies of progressive causes, Big Tech does not exactly have an ally in the White House. President Biden has shown signs that he is more than willing to impose stricter regulations on Big Tech. Within this context, these spending figures on lobbying by Big Tech also suggest an underlying anxiety about the future. Big Tech companies see the writing on the wall and are marshaling their resources to ensure that they get to help write the rules when the time comes.
Engagement Resources:
Public Citizen’s Report on Lobbying and Campaign Contributions
https://www.citizen.org/article/big-tech-lobbying-update/
Gilens and Page’s 2014 Study
Gilens and Page’s 2014 Study: Summary Outlining Major Points For Quick Reading
https://lwvaustin.org/publications/Money%20in%20Politics/Gilens%20&%20Page%20article%20summary.pdf
One Issue’s Report and NYT Coverage
https://www.issueone.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Issue-One-Outsized-Influence-Report-final.pdf
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/20/us/politics/megadonors-political-spending.html
Jeff Bezos’ D.C. Megamansion
https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-hq2-why-washington-dc-will-win-jeff-bezos-mansion-2018-1
Amazon Pentagon Cloud Deal
Reporting on Google’s Corporate Restructuring
https://observer.com/2019/06/google-lobbying-firms-antitrust-probe/
10 Most Hated Companies in America 2020
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/10-most-hated-companies-america-100021771.html
Will Biden Save OSHA? An Assessment of the Weakened Regulatory Agency
Brief # 103 Health and Gender Policy
Will Biden Save OSHA? An Assessment of the Weakened Regulatory Agency
By Lily Lady Cook
April 26,2021
Summary: The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) was founded in 1971 to protect workers from hazards on the job. OSHA has faced intermittent funding challenges since the ‘70s, and reached new lows under the previous administration. Currently, the U.S. has one labor inspector for every 70,000 people although The International Labor Organization recommends one for every 10,000 people. This means that about 1,850 inspectors are responsible for overseeing the safety of 130 million workers.
At the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Department of Labor criticized OSHA for its lack of regulatory guidance and decreased on-site inspections. On the campaign trail, President Biden called upon then-President Trump to double the amount of OSHA investigators; once in office, he instructed OSHA to release Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) guidelines for employers by March 15. OSHA did not follow through on this order, possibly due to legal barriers related to the ‘grave danger’ precondition necessary for their release. In the absence of federal guidelines, separate states established their own ETSs. OSHA did, however, issue a National Emphasis Program in March, which increased pandemic-related inspection mandates for high hazard industries.
As part of the American Jobs Plan, Biden called on Congress to allocate $48 billion to develop workforce infrastructure and protection, of which $10 billion would be allocated for increased penalty enforcements. Yet most of this plan involves vague language about giving the government “the tools it needs to ensure employers are providing workers with….safe and healthy workplaces” by supporting increased “capacity” at agencies such as OSHA. The plan leaves unclear exactly how many more investigators are needed and how much existing penalties should be increased.
Still, many labor activists find optimism in Biden’s nominee to lead OSHA, Doug Parker. Parker began his career as an attorney at the United Mine Workers of America. He later served under the Obama administration at the Mine Safety and Health Administration, and is currently the head of California’s division of OSHA (Cal/OSHA). Cal/OSHA outperforms most other state OSHA agencies in citations for safety issues, and its ETS on COVID-19 was far more detailed than those of other states.
It remains to be seen when Parker’s Senate confirmation hearing will be, as none is yet scheduled.
Analysis:
OSHA and other agencies are plagued by chronic disinvestment, and it’s no surprise that some states stepped in to establish their own regulations during the pandemic; California, Michigan, Oregon and other states issued their own COVID-19 ETSs. Moreover, 28 states are authorized by OSHA to operate their own safety programs, which often have stricter regulations than federal standards.
While this might at first glance instill confidence in states’ ability to self-regulate, is this really the direction we want to move in? It’s true that stronger state laws could help with safety controls, and increased state budgets would allow more leeway for individualized programs. But having stronger federal rules and enforcement mechanisms would be more advantageous to the country as a whole. This would avoid the problem of big manufacturers seeking out states with fast-and-loose rules and ensure that state partisanship wouldn’t affect worker safety outcomes.
An increased budget for OSHA is a good place to start, and with Doug Parker at the helm, things could really turn around. The pandemic has underscored the vulnerabilities of factory and other essential workers, giving some momentum to some much-needed changes.
Yet OSHA must do more than just increase its number of inspectors and citations. The agency needs to keep up with modernizing industries by crafting prompt responses to technologies with new associated risk factors. OSHA’s record of swift action is dismal: it took decades to change a rule about crystalline silica dust.
It remains to be seen whether OSHA will have the budget for the effective implementation of these changes, which will ultimately be the determining factor for any sweeping reforms.
Engagement Resources:
-Contact Bobby Scott, the chairman of the Congressional Committee on Education and Labor, the committee that oversees OSHA
–Attend a public meeting over zoom: While there are no upcoming hearings scheduled for the Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions Subcommittee, you can watch previous meetings here.
–Know your rights: OSHA covers most workers in the private sector and some in the public sector. Their website offers information about safety equipment standards as well as forms to request an inspection or report injuries on the job.
New Top Dogs, Same Old Tricks: Uncovering the Power of Big Tech, Part 2
Technology Brief #45
New Top Dogs, Same Old Tricks: Uncovering the Power of Big Tech, Part 2
Beware the Guise of Progressivism
By Scout Burchill
April 24, 2021
Summary:
What exactly does progressivism mean nowadays? This question is worth thinking about as a consortium of tech companies have recently announced the creation of a business association called the Chamber of Progress. Positioning itself as a center-left progressive organization, it is funded by tech companies like Amazon, Facebook, Doordash, Google, Grubhub, Instacart, Twitter, Uber, Zillow and a few others. Their website describes the partnership as “a new tech industry coalition devoted to a progressive society, economy, workforce, and consumer climate.”
Beyond advocating for progressive causes, the organization aims to steer the conversation around tech regulation and Section 230, of which they oppose any reform or repeal. The Chamber’s first official policy engagement is to support the passage of two recent voting rights legislation bills (the “For the People Act” and the “John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act”) and to condemn voter suppression proposals that are currently pending in 43 states.
Analysis:
Beware the guise of progressivism. At face value, it is hard to be critical of an organization currently advocating for voting rights, however, one quick peek below the surface proves that the Chamber of Progress is just another example of Big Tech’s massive influence campaign on American politics and society. The Chamber is an exemplary case study in how progressive causes and the language of progressivism has been co-opted by corporate interests, especially over the past few years, signaling a somewhat strange but potentially momentous shift in the mainstream cultural and political landscape. The term woke washing has emerged to describe this phenomenon.
At the heart of this phenomenon is a schism between economic progressivism and cultural progressivism. True progressivism bridges this schism by melding issues of representation and injustice with an understanding of the economic system and the structures of power that produce suffering, exploitation and inequality. By adopting the language of social justice advocacy and the aesthetics of cultural progressivism, corporations and powerful people are learning to leverage the social capital of the progressive movement in order to amplify their power and cushion their bottom lines.
There are countless examples that illustrate this dynamic. For one, the Chamber claims to advocate for a more progressive workforce. Based on the track records of its corporate funders, this could mean literally anything. As previously covered here (see Tech Brief #25), tech companies like Uber, Instacart and Doordash led a massive push to defeat Prop 22 in California, which would have extended employee protections to ride-share drivers. Many tech companies profit enormously from the gig economy, offering no benefits, healthcare or protections to precarious workers often toiling for pay below the minimum wage. Some might call this innovation, progressives call it exploitation. Amazon’s notorious anti-union busting efforts are well documented and further call into question the Chamber’s meaning of a progressive workforce (see Tech Briefs #27 & #40). Needless to say, this type of exploitation disproportionately affects poor to working class black and brown communities.
Real progressivism aims to challenge centers of power and advance a vision of society in which freedom, prosperity and dignity is possible for all. The original progressive movement was forged out of the excesses of the Gilded Age. The second industrial revolution which started in the late 1800s led to an astounding degree of wealth inequality that concentrated power in the hands of a small group of elites. Think Rockefellers, Carnegies, Vanderbilts, Fords, etc. As growing corporate power threatened individual freedom as well as the opportunity to make a dignified living, progressive reformers emerged to fight for a more equitable society and a fairer economic system for poor and working class people.
President Biden has warned of the dangers of the fourth industrial revolution, or the digital revolution, and the perils it poses to middle and working class Americans. The parallels between our current political and societal ills and that of the Gilded Age are obvious to many and perhaps this is why progressivism is having such a moment in the spotlight. This reality however makes the tech world’s constant woke washing and progressive camouflaging particularly perverse and pernicious. If the richest men in the world are suddenly all progressives, then what does progressivism even mean?
The linguistic similarity between the Chamber of Progress and the Chamber of Commerce, one of the most powerful pro-business lobbying groups in Washington, may be merely a fluke, but it is revealing nonetheless. There is a seismic shift currently underway in our societal landscape. Movement Conservatism, the right-wing coalition made up of neoconservatives and the religious right which established political and cultural dominance under President Reagan, is beginning to unravel. In other words, the Republican Party is grasping at straws and in total disarray. Once the party of limitless deregulation, business friendly policies, and anti-government screeds, the Republican party is now engaging in an outright war of words with corporations who publicly denounce the party’s embrace of the “Big Lie” and its recent bevy of attacks on voting rights. Many in the party accuse these corporations of bowing to the ‘woke mob’ and are openly threatening to withhold corporate welfare. Their reactionary politics lacks a coherent vision and their old playbook of cutting taxes for the rich and pandering to the religious right is looking less and less feasible as a political strategy.
The political and cultural winds have shifted and progressivism is now in vogue. The centers of capital and economic power in the country have begun to coalesce around a new vision of a “progressive” society. Of course there is some sense of progress in this shifting landscape, however, there is still plenty to be wary of.
Learn More:
Chamber of Progress’ official site
Axios reporting on Chamber
American Economic Liberties Project on Chamber of Progress
Brief History of Progressivism
https://www.britannica.com/topic/progressivism
Interview with Chamber of Progress’ Founder Alex Kovacevich
https://www.protocol.com/policy/democrats-google-policy-head-kovacevich
President Biden on the Fourth Industrial Revolution
Movement Conservatism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movement_conservatism
Republican Mob Tactics
American Withdrawal From Afghanistan
Brief # 108 Foreign Policy
American Withdrawal From Afghanistan
By Will Solomon
April 23, 2021
Policy Summary:
Last week, President Biden announced plans for an American military withdrawal from Afghanistan by September 11 of this year. The date will mark the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, the events that precipitated the invasion of that country, and the catalyst for what subsequently became the longest-running war in American history. Biden’s announcement was received largely positively, both by those who have demanded the withdrawal for a long time (Biden himself once stated that America would leave Afghanistan by 2014) and even by some more traditionally hawkish members of the national security establishment, who recognize the war has lost popular support and legitimacy, and is in practice un-winnable.
This is not to say approval was universal: a significant sector of the national security state would evidently be content with a drawn-out occupation, and many neoconservatives—Max Boot, Bill Kristol, Liz Cheney, and others—have been vocal in their opposition to Biden’s plan. There are also reservations from the anti-war sector: many contend that Biden’s announcement obscures the heavy unofficial American military presence, in the form of special forces, drones, and mercenaries and other contractors who will remain after American troops leave. Across the spectrum, there is also concern for the direction Afghanistan may go, even if clear solutions to avoiding outcomes like a Taliban takeover are not readily apparent.
Ultimately, Biden’s decision was overdue and necessary, if possibly insufficient—in part because of the reality of American special forces and contractors who will remain and have even less oversight than would a proper military presence. In this light, Afghanistan could well become a theatre of American warfare more akin to Somalia, or Yemen. Ultimately, the best hope for lasting peace in Afghanistan may involve multilateral negotiations, particularly with the support and involvement of states that border Afghanistan—particularly Pakistan, Iran, and China.
Analysis:
The American War in Afghanistan has clearly been lost for quite some time, perhaps doomed since inception. Afghanistan, colloquially known as the “graveyard of empires,” has been historically near-impossible to effectively occupy. The Americans are only the latest iteration in a pattern than included the British and Soviet Union, among others. Even the Taliban, ruling the country in the 1990s, could not exercise control over vast swaths of Afghanistan.
A neat assessment of the Afghanistan War is difficult but it must, in sum, be deemed a failure. The Taliban will likely return to power after a 20-year interim, and new Jihadist groups like ISIS have, for now, gained a foothold in the country. Supporters of the war may point to social progress, women’s rights, improvements in education, and other reforms—which are not to be blithely dismissed—as evidence of its successes. However, it must be remembered that, first, this was not the objective of the war—the purpose was (officially) to dislodge al-Qaeda—and second and more pragmatically, the price at which these reforms came has been impossible to maintain: a constant insurgency, a weak and corrupt central state, a thriving drug trade, and ongoing civilian and military casualties.
As Americans, our chief concern ought to be our role and responsibility in destabilizing that region. Has the American presence in Afghanistan been beneficial or harmful for the Afghan people, and the American people? This question cannot be seriously answered without considering the indescribable brutality of the American occupation—which has included everything from training death squads to attacking hospitals. (For this reason among others, the presence of mercenaries and special forces in the country, with even less accountability than regular troops, is particularly troubling, especially if the war further recedes from American consciousness).
It should also be acknowledged that the American public was systematically lied to about this war for most of its duration. As the almost immediately-forgotten Afghanistan Papers revealed, the military and members of the national security state were aware for much of the war’s length that it was effectively un-winnable—and they lied to the public and manipulated data to obscure this fact and suggest the war was having successes.
In short—it is important and a (hopefully) positive step that American troops will withdraw (although it is worth considering that September 11 of this year will be too late for the Taliban, who oppose the extension of the May 1 withdrawal date that was negotiated by the Trump administration). But at least Biden is not fully disregarding the plan to withdraw. There are no entirely easy answers here, and this Brief hardly offers a comprehensive assessment of the conflict in Afghanistan—but it is clear that American troops are doing more harm than good, and it is past time for them to leave.
Engagement Resources:
https://quincyinst.org — “The Quincy Institute is an action-oriented think tank that will lay the foundation for a new foreign policy centered on diplomatic engagement and military restraint. The current moment presents a once-in-a-generation opportunity to bring together like-minded progressives and conservatives and set U.S. foreign policy on a sensible and humane footing.”
https://www.democracynow.org — “Democracy Now! produces a daily, global, independent news hour hosted by award-winning journalists Amy Goodman and Juan González. Our reporting includes breaking daily news headlines and in-depth interviews with people on the front lines of the world’s most pressing issues.”
https://aboutfaceveterans.org — “We are Post-9/11 service members and veterans organizing to end a foreign policy of permanent war and the use of military weapons, tactics, and values in communities across the country. As people intimately familiar with the inner workings of the world’s largest military, we use our knowledge and experiences to expose the truth about these conflicts overseas and the growing militarization in the United States.”
Derek Chauvin Found Guilty in Trial over George Floyd’s Death
Brief # 104 Social Justice
Derek Chauvin Found Guilty in Trial over George Floyd’s Death
By Erika Shannon
April 24, 2021
For almost a month, the nation has been watching the trial of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin. He was on trial for murdering 46-year-old George Floyd; the unfortunate events leading to Floyd’s death unfolded when police were called to a convenience store over a counterfeit twenty-dollar bill. Former officer Chauvin responded to this call (with 3 other Minneapolis police officers), and ended up kneeling on George Floyd, cutting off his air supply for approximately 9 minutes and 29 seconds.
On April 20th, Derek Chauvin was found guilty on all three counts that he was facing in the trial: unintentional second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter. Sentencing will be in eight weeks, and while the charges collectively add up to 75 years in prison, focus will be on the most serious charge of second-degree murder. This charge carries with it up to 40 years in prison. Many are holding their breath and hoping for the maximum sentence possible.
It is undeniably true that the American justice system has failed people of color time and time again; most recently, there has been a failure to prosecute law enforcement officers who have killed minorities in the line of duty. According to research by Bowling Green State University from 2005-2019, 104 nonfederal sworn law enforcement officers with general powers of arrest were arrested for murder or manslaughter resulting from an on-duty shooting where the officer shot and killed someone. Of those 104 who were arrested, only 35 were convicted of a crime resulting from the on-duty shooting, and only four officers were convicted of murder.
While the research does not indicate race of those killed by the police, there is a disturbing trend nonetheless. We have seen these cops slip through the cracks when they should have been sitting in jail. A prime example of this are the officers involved in the March 2020 death of Breonna Taylor in Kentucky; the officer who fired the deadly shot was charged, but not for her murder. Instead, he was charged with “wanton endangerment” for firing into a neighboring apartment. Derek Chauvin did not get off as easy as his Kentucky counterparts, and he will actually pay for his crime.
The guilty verdict of Derek Chauvin may have some impact on policing, as well as racial justice issues, here in the U.S. Cops like Derek Chauvin may not be the majority of police in America; however, his actions reflect poorly on the police profession.
In his trial, we witnessed his own co-workers and chief of police testify that his actions were not in accordance with department policy. It is about time that police officers stop hiding the truth for one another so that there can be accountability within police departments. Cops exist to uphold the law, and it seems they need a reminder that they are not above the law themselves. With this guilty verdict is the hope that we will see police officers check one another on their misconduct, and there is the hope that we will see the justice system hold police accountable for their unjustifiable killings of unarmed civilians.
Racial tensions are high in America, and a lack of racial sensitivity in police forces around the country is not helping matters. We need to take the legal steps to ensure that police are held accountable for their actions, including ending the practice of qualified immunity for police officers, and enacting tighter and transparent standards for their use of deadly force.
ENGAGEMENT RESOURCES
- For more information and articles regarding Derek Chauvin’s trial, visit The Marshall Project criminal justice webpage.
To view court documents related to Derek Chauvin’s trial, visit the Minnesota Judicial Branch webpage
Our Migrant Workforce: Who Are They? How Did They Get Here?
Immigration Policy Brief #121
Our Migrant Workforce: Who Are They? How Did They Get Here?
By Kathryn Baron
April 22, 2021
Policy Summary
Migrant workers support the US economy providing American industries like agriculture and technology the critical labor force they need to prosper. In 2019, more than 900,000 temporary foreign workers visas were granted, compared to only 400,000 in 1994. During lockdown measures in 2020, Trump suspended all temporary work visas to ensure public health safety.
The first migrant labor program came during WWI due to severe labor shortages and drew in agricultural laborers primarily from Mexico. In 1952, lawmakers attempted to regulate and consolidate temporary visa regulations into a comprehensive Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which introduced the H2 visa (the precursor to the H1B). There are currently 4 types of H-visas for temporary workers (with the 4th being for spouses and unmarried children of H-visa recipients). See below for an explanation of the different H type visas that that are used by migrant workers.
Of the roughly 2.4 million farmworkers in the US, up to 70% (1.68 MILLION) are undocumented. An additional 200,000 come seasonally under H2A visas. California, Iowa, Nebraska, Texas, and Minnesota are the biggest producers of crops and livestock, and are heavily reliant on cheap labor by migrant workers predominantly from Mexico and Central America. Agriculture contributes to around 5% of American GDP, with US farms contributing at least $133 billion of that.
Undocumented workers (illegal immigrants) make up 5.5 million of essential workers in the US. Since they are undocumented, they do not enjoy any benefits or protections that would ensure job security and are often employed ‘at-will,’ meaning they can be fired with little justification or explanation. (Note that it is illegal for an employer to hire an undocumented immigrant.) They are not members of labor unions and/or may sometimes be paid informally. Nearly a million of undocumented workers work in restaurants and are vital to daily functions and operations, pandemic notwithstanding.
A Primer on Migrant Worker Visas
The first, an H1B visa, is for workers in fields requiring special knowledge. There is a 3-year limit, eligible for a one-time renewal. H1B visas are predominantly for individuals in computer, software engineering, and tech consulting with the top 3 countries of origin being India, China, and Mexico. In recent years, it has switched to a lottery system due to overwhelming quantities of applicants, far exceeding the 85,000 annual cap. Corporate executives have pushed for the government to expand the program rather than resorting to a lottery system, as it puts major American companies at a disadvantage. Some major corporations find the H1B visa recipients to be crucial for making up for the shortage of qualified domestic applicants.
The second, an H2A visa,is for seasonal/temporary agricultural workers working predominantly in general farm work and industries like tobacco, oranges, and cotton. The top 3 countries of origin are Mexico, Jamaica, and South Africa. There are no annual caps for these visas, but their duration only lasts for one year with up to 3 consecutive renewals. Under H2A visas, employers cover housing and international travel, but provide relatively low wages and little job security benefits such as paid sick leave and time off. Housing conditions are often deplorable, with the federal guidelines dictating a 40-square-feet requirement per person, roughly the size of a large closet. Similarly, the H2B visa, for seasonal/temporary workers not in agricultural sectors, has the same duration and renewal limits. Most H2B holders are from Mexico, Jamaica, and Guatemala and work in landscaping, forestry, and housekeeping. In 2018, for the first time, the H2B visas system switched to a lottery system. Many employers find the H2A and H2B visas to be inefficient and inflexible.
To issue and obtain H-visas require several steps and involves several executive agencies. Employers must first obtain a certification from the Department of Labor and prove there are no qualified or available workers within the US for the positions necessary. They then file a nonimmigrant worker petition with the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services on behalf of prospective workers. Once approved, workers apply to their local US embassy for a visa and interview with Consular officers, usually entailing provision of evidence they intend to return to their country of origin.
Analysis
Migrant workers have been vilified and falsely accused of stealing American jobs, and exploited by employers across sectors. However, they are arguably the backbone of the agriculture and service industry and play a pivotal role in guaranteeing food supply stability. During the COVID-19 pandemic, employers have had to adjust to accommodate social distancing measures. Migrant workers, especially those who work in agriculture, are routinely exposed to pesticides which makes them potentially immunocompromised and more at-risk for COVID-19.
Migrant workers, most of whom were already in the US due to the temporary visa freeze, were deemed essential during COVID-19, but most lacked access to essential benefits and protections like decent wages, overtime pay, and health insurance. The US reaps the benefits of being the “melting pot of risk-takers.” Our immigration system needs reform – most Americans can agree, regardless of party affiliation. The Biden Administration should aim to simultaneously strengthen management of the border while providing pathways to citizenship for illegal immigrants who are already here and increasing quotas for legal immigrants. Being too lax will overwhelm the system and force xenophobic or even slightly immigration conservative voters to opt for stricter border and immigration laws regardless of the implications.
Engagement Resources
- The 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.
- The ACLU: a non-profit with a longstanding commitment to preserving and protecting the individual rights and liberties the Constitution and US laws guarantee all its citizens. You can also donate monthly to counter Trump’s attacks on people’s rights. Recently, the ACLU has filed a lawsuit challenging the separation of families at the border.
- Center for Disease Control: the CDC provides updated information surrounding COVID-19 and the US responses
- Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA): Through the Department of Homeland Security’s website, this link provides additional information regarding the Obama era program.