Sign up for updates
Donate today
Join our newsletter
JOBS

JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES

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

Latest Jobs Posts

 

Trump’s Refusal to Accept Defeat: Another Reason Why He Is Not Fit For Office

Brief #4—Transition of Power
By Linda F. Hersey
Although Donald Trump is the first sitting president to refuse to concede after losing a U.S. democratic election – shocking the nation and leaders across the world —  his wild claims of conspiracy and election fraud come as no surprise to a handful of academics, attorneys and political strategists who weighed the danger of such an outcome prior to Election 2020.

read more

Explaining the Minimum Wage

Brief #99—Economics
By Rosalind Gottfried
The term minimum wage actually refers to several different things.  There is the federal minimum wage which is the lowest wage that employers can pay their workers unless they are in an exempt category of tipped workers.

read more
Jobs01 e1489352304814
Trump’s Escalation of Tensions in Portland: Who Does It Benefit?

Trump’s Escalation of Tensions in Portland: Who Does It Benefit?

Trump’s Escalation of Tensions in Portland: Who Does It Benefit?

Summary

Recent weeks have seen growing unrest in Portland, OR in response to the deployment of federal officers from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

This deployment comes as a result of President Trump’s June 26, 2020 Executive Order, which was issued in response to the destruction of several national monuments as part of the protest movement ignited by the police killing of George Floyd.

The protests have continued for nearly two months and have morphed into more localized movements with varied objectives and demands. The mass unemployment, financial instability, and stir craziness of huge portions of the population due to the Covid-19 pandemic has no doubt contributed to the tense standoff. Add the political theatrics guiding decisions in a presidential election year, and the explosive situation begins to make sense.

While deploying the DHS officers was ostensibly intended to protect federal property from destruction by protesters (or “violent anarchists” according to DHS), their presence has  led to an escalation of the protests. Many photos on social media depict the scenes of a brutal police state or foreign military invasion. Outrage was echoed around the country in response to reports of unidentified, heavily armed officers driving up in unmarked vans and abducting citizens off the street without explanation. In response, a “Wall of Moms,” “Wall of Dads,” and most recently a “Wall of Vets” have represented the public opposition to this heavy-handed occupation.

Most of these officers come from a group known as BORTAC (Border Patrol Tactical Unit), the Border Patrol’s equivalent of a SWAT team, which is normally tasked with investigating drug smuggling organizations. According to a leaked internal DHS memo, these officers have not been specifically trained in riot control or mass demonstrations. The memo seems to acknowledge the problems created by this lack of training: “Moving forward, if this type of response is going to be the norm, specialized training and standardized equipment should be deployed to responding agencies.”

A separate DHS internal memo revealed that federal intelligence agencies are using the opportunity to gather information on the protesters.

Analysis

The deployment of federal officers from the DHS into Portland, OR has shifted Trump’s “law and order” rhetoric into an authoritarian reality.

Despite the pretense of protecting federal property, the forceful occupation of the city by DHS troops against the will of the Democratic mayor has only intensified the protests. Tensions have grown as news media report on these events to countless people confined in their home.

No doubt this escalation was not only predictable but inevitable with the deployment. We might look one step deeper into what Trump hopes to accomplish through the escalation.

Given his sagging numbers relative to Joe Biden, nothing weighs more heavily on Trump’s mind at present than his reelection.

When it comes to his handling of the Covid-19, only 32% of Americans approve of Trump’s actions, and he has recently shifted tone on recommendations for wearing a mask after months of defiance. Meanwhile, coverage of the protests is triggering an  increasingly divisive reactions depending on your news source. This situation tends to cause Americans to fight against one another, with Trump’s base going to his defense without considering the contradiction of sending armed federal troops to deal with peaceful protests..

The photos and videos depict a standoff that mesmerizes, overwhelms, and divides, and they also represent a genius way for the president to distract from the failures of Trump and Congress. Trump’s aggressive efforts to send federal troops to partrol American cities is vicious and wrong, but by focusing on this conflict, we are playing directly into his hands.

Resistance Resources:

  • Find Your Representatives allows you to find your representatives, how to contact them, bills they’ve introduced, committees they serve on, and political contributions they’ve received.
  • GovTrack.us tracks the United States Congress and helps Americans participate in their national legislature.
Michigan-Part 1

Michigan-Part 1

2020 Congressional Campaign Update

2020 Congressional Campaign Updates is a new feature of U.S. RESIST NEWS. It is intended to  help our readers follow Congressional   races in the House and Senate that are key to the ability of democrats to gain control of both houses of Congress.

Update # 6

Michigan-Part 1

By: William Bourque

Presidential battleground state election results are great predictors of what direction the nation is headed politically, and Michigan is the perfect exemplar.  In 2016, Michigan fell narrowly to President Trump, which aligns with the results of presidential election in that year.  The results from Michigan’s 2018 Congressional election didn’t quite align with the national trend with House of representative seats going to  9 Republicans and 5 Democrats.

Michigan also  has  two democratic senators, Debbie Stabenow and Gary Peters.  Michigan also boasts former republican-turned-libertarian Justin Amash, who, until mid-May, was running for president.

To try and figure out where Michigan might go this year, let’s take a look at some of their Congressional races.

In the 1st district, the republican’s will almost certainly keep the seat held by  incumbent Jack Bergman, who is in the midst of his second term.  The district was held mostly by Democrats until 2011, but has remained in Republican control since.  This district is one that President Trump will probably win easily.

Michigan’s 2nd district is located on the upper peninsula, a rural area of the state.  The majority of its residents identify as white and republicans are the highest registered voting group.  The incumbent is republican Bill Huizenga, who won the seat in 2010 after another republican, Peter Hoekstra, stepped down.  All polls show that democratic challenger Bryan Berghoef, a pastor who has focused on campaign finance reform, has an uphill battle.

The incumbent in District 3, Justin Amash, has had an eventful year.  He announced his bid for the presidency as a libertarian in early 2020, but decided to take his name out of the running in Mid-May.  He has also decided he will not be running for congress, which leaves an opening that could lead to a much tighter race than in the past.  Hillary Scholten, an immigration attorney, is the democratic nominee and has shown that she has a significant base, raising almost 1 million dollars.  The republican that leads in funding, via opensecrets, is Peter Meijer, a veteran and urban developer.  The republican primary on August 4th will determine the nominee, but Meijer is our bet to face Scholten.

The 4th district of Michigan is one that is strongly republican and we expect it to stay that way.  It doesn’t include any major metropolitan areas and has a strong republican base that voted for President Trump in 2016.  John Moolenaar is the incumbent  and won sizably in 2016, by about 70,000 votes.  Jerry Hilliard, who ran for the seat in 2016, is the leading candidate in the primary and we expect him to face Moolenaar but to ultimately lose.

District 5  includes a moderately sized metropolitan area, the city of Flint.  Dan Kildee is the incumbent and he seems to have a solid grasp on the seat.  Kildee has been an outspoken advocate for federal funding being given to Flint because of their water crisis and lead the way in having a $170 million relief fund sent to the city in 2016.  His likely opponent is Republican state representative Tim Kelly, who doesn’t seem to pose much of a threat. We expect the democrats to hold onto this seat by a fair margin.

We will provide continuing coverage of all of the house races in Michigan as well as house races in several key presidential battlegrounds.

Trump Signs Memorandum to Exclude Immigrants from US Census

Trump Signs Memorandum to Exclude Immigrants from US Census

Policy Summary

On July 21, President Trump signed a Memorandum that would exclude undocumented immigrants from the US Census. Congressional districts are set to be redrawn in 2021, so this effectively bars undocumented immigrants from being included in this count. Persuading immigrant communities to partake in the US Census has been a battle and many civil rights groups expressed that  only recently were they able to communicate the benefits of the US Census to immigrants many of whom are suspicious about filling out the Census form.

President Trump attempted in 2019 to include a question on the US Census where individuals were to disclose if they were in the US legally (legal immigration or citizen) or illegally. This was shut down, but the Trump Administration has been relentless in its anti-immigration endeavors.  Trump will have reduced legal immigration by 49% next year if current policies continue. The ACLU and CASA have already made statements about their plans to take Trump’s order to court and challenge the Memorandum as unconstitutional. According to the US Constitution, Congressional Representation is to be determined based on “the whole number of free persons” not only those who are American citizens. While, this basis is outdated and overtly still a slavery-era provision, it explicitly dictates immigrants’ rights to be included in the Congressional redrawing of districts to occur in 2021.

Analysis

Weaponizing the US Census will harm employers and the national economy as well as immigrant communities. The US labor force and our economic growth is intrinsically tied to migrant workers ability to live and work in the US. If the anti-immigration policies continue, the average annual labor force growth is on track to lower by 59%. During a global pandemic that has undoubtedly rocked the US medical system, economy, and academic institutions, this decline would only further US economic depression and unemployment.

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.
  • Border Network for Human Rights: network to engage education, organization and participation of border communities to defend human rights and work towards a society where everyone is equal in rights and dignity.
  • 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
Florida’s Vote Restoration For Felons Suffers Setback At Supreme Court

Florida’s Vote Restoration For Felons Suffers Setback At Supreme Court

Policy Summary: The Twenty – Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides in Section One:

The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

On November 6, 2018 voters in the State of Florida approved the ballot initiative known as Amendment 4. The initiative would permit Florida felons to be restored with the right to vote after they had completed all the terms of their sentence. Florida voters approved Amendment 4 overwhelmingly with 64.55% voting in favor while 35.45% voted against the measure. In 2019, due to Republican opposition to Amendment 4, Governor Ron DeSantis signed a bill that added an additional requirement before the right to vote was restored. SB 7066 required that felons must also pay all fines and fees associated with their sentence.

The battle then moved to the court system. The Florida Supreme Court ruled that the law was constitutional. However, another suit was brought in federal district court in Florida which ruled that the additional requirements of SB 7066 violated the U.S. Constitution and therefore the court issued an injunction blocking implementation of SB 7066. That ruling was appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, which just ruled to uphold the injunction of the law issued by the federal district court. LEARN MORE

Policy Analysis: While this decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit is a win for voting rights advocates it is certainly not the end of the case. The injunction initially issued by U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle was only an order to prevent the law from going into effect until the issue can be decided on the merits at a full trial. With the injunction upheld by the appeals court the law remains frozen pending the non – jury trial that had been scheduled, which will begin in April 2020.

Additionally, Governor De Santis’ has indicated that he was disappointed with the ruling and intends to appeal the decision. An appeal would likely take several months to be resolved and might not be resolved in time for the November 2020 elections. However, a number of academics have calculated that the number of felons who would have their voting rights restored is 1.4 million which can certainly sway an election or an initiative on the ballot. This explains why both parties are going to extreme lengths to fight for the future of this issue. Republicans had initially opposed Amendment 4 and suffered an unexpected defeat when voters overwhelmingly approved it. In turn, Democrats have accused Republicans of trying to oppose the popular will of voters by adding additional requirements that would blunt the move to add 1.4 million more voters to the state rolls. And if the case moves up through the appeals process and eventually to the U.S. Supreme Court that will also likely bring up the constitutional poll tax issue which was outlawed with the 24th Amendment in 1964. The stakes are certainly high and while many would have liked to have had this issue resolved in time for the November 2020 elections it seems up in the air whether 1.4 million former felons in Florida will have their voting rights restored by the end of the year. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE

Update: On July 16, 2020 the Supreme Court of the United States issued an order in the case Raysor v. De Santis. After a long, complex and winding road through the Florida judiciary and then the federal judiciary the case reached the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. The federal district court had issued a permanent injunction which resulted in the law being allowed to go into effect with a number of remedies crafted by the trial court. Judge Robert Hinkle allowed felons to rebut the presumption that they were unable to pay as determined by the State, allowed felons to seek how much they owed in order to vote (this was likely a rebuke to Florida due to the state’s admission at trial that they did not keep accurate records nor had a workable database as to what felons owe the state in terms of fines and fees) and ordered the state to let felons register to vote without being prosecuted for a violation of the law. But when the case was appealed the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued an order without an opinion that did not allow the remedies from the trial court to go into effect. That move essentially did not permit felons to have their voting rights restored, for the moment. The case was then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court upheld the Eleventh Circuit court order which in effect leaves 1.4 million Florida felons without the right to cast a ballot in upcoming state and federal elections in Florida for the foreseeable future. The case will proceed on the merits at a later date but the emergency application to have the law reinstated immediately has been denied.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a dissent to the Supreme Court order. She brought up the Purcell Principle, which has played a leading role in a number of Supreme Court decisions regarding voting rights this term. The Purcell Principle, which comes from the 2006 Supreme Court case Purcell v. Gonzalez, cautions against making voting changes so close to election day in order to not confuse and burden voters who might not be up to the date on the new changes. As Justice Sotomayor sees it, by blocking the law from going into effect the court is creating more confusion for felons as they now cannot rely on a law to figure out whether they are eligible to vote. If the goal is to create a stable voting atmosphere devoid of last minute voting rules changes, then why did the Supreme Court choose a path that makes a number of last minute voting changes that causes a felon to be unsure whether they are eligible to vote or not? Justice Sotomayor’s dissent is a pointed rebuke to the reasoning and rationale the Court has charted this term with regard to voting rights. It as a disappointing moment for the issue of vote restoration for felons but the case still remains to be played out as a hearing on the merits of the issue (as well as the application of the Twenty – Fourth Amendment) is scheduled for August 2020 in the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. U.S. RESIST NEWS will provide updates and analysis for our readers as they continue to develop.

LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE

Engagement Resources

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.

Can the US Afford Not to Become a Nicer, Kinder Society?

Can the US Afford Not to Become a Nicer, Kinder Society?

Summary

Many feel work to be a citizen’s right as well as a personal source of income and satisfaction.  Recently US unemployment has been as high as 14.7% though some experts estimate it actually may be as high as 20%.  Labor force participation has fallen to 60.2%.  Job loss is not an equal opportunity trend.  It is well documented that low wage workers are suffering greater losses than professionally employed persons.  It also is undisputed that people of color, especially Latinos and African Americans have been hard hit by the pandemic as have women. Predictions regarding when the labor force will regain its pre-pandemic levels are fluid and growing worse with the recent virus  resurgence and the mandated school closings.  The future shape of work in American is going to change, possibly in good and bad ways.

The potential benefits for those who telecommute are enticing.  Greater flexibility in the workday; reduced or nonexistent commutes; less work associated costs such as clothes, gas, and meals; and cheaper rents/mortgages are among the most apparent.  Companies will benefit as well, saving up to $11,000 per employee expenses.  More people working remotely and at-home can have a detrimental effect on other sectors of society as these changes will cause concomitant losses in restaurant serves, retail, flying, personal services, and housecleaning.

For low wage workers the pandemic-induced economic downturn is likely to lead to fewer job opportunities and stagnant or decreased wages a pattern that has been prevalent for the past forty years.  Loss of jobs to automation, already a fear of the previous decade or more, may be accelerated.

But, perhaps the greatest economic  impact will be felt among the cohort of students who are attending high school in the era of the pandemic.It is predicted that the “at risk” populations of students of color and among low income students will suffer the greatest deprivations as a consequence to distance learning; they will lose more in educational advancement and will be more likely to drop out of schooling.  This will not only greatly impact their personal incomes but will have a significant impact on the overall economy.

McKinsey & Company has estimated that if students do not attend classes until January 2021, students with poor online instruction will loses an average of 7-11 months of skill development and those who receive no instruction will lose 12-14 months.  Those with adequate instruction will lag behind by 3-4 months compared to in-class instruction.  If classrooms are not reconvened for the spring term, the situation will be even worse.  Estimates suggest, for example, that 60% of low income students regularly log on to online instruction compared to 90% of high income students and some states have no mandated online coursework.   This will surely exacerbate current achievement gaps.  It is suggested that these achievement gaps will cost individuals the equivalent of a year’s salary over their lifetime. The cost to the economy will be about 110 billion dollars annually for the working years of the current cohort of students in high school.

In additional to lost wages, educational attainment is correlated with better health; reduced crime; decreases in incarceration; greater family stability; and increased political participation.  Addressing these deficiencies in a growing group of the population has not yet been defined in monetary terms but  we cannot afford to ignore these trends.

Policy

There are many suggestions of ways to ameliorate these issues.  For education, policy-makers need to  spend more money and create enrichment programs for students; provide greater opportunities for support, tutors, quiet workspaces; assure the necessary educational “infrastructure,” with satisfactory computers, internet access, study areas, desks, lighting, and good chairs.  Provide real skills learning and training for teachers  and mental health support for students, families, and instructors.  The federal government needs to step up to the plate and support these measures because the strain on states will make them unable to fully address these needs.

For employment, there are also many solutions, for example a living wage, daycare, adequate sick leave, family leave, and some safety measures will have real impacts.  For furloughed or unemployed workers, skills training for labor force re-entry should be a priority.

Congress must act quickly in a number of ways.  There should be a second, generous CARES act continuing unemployment aid for all including those usually ineligible; health insurance and healthcare for those who are newly or chronically uninsured; and paid sick leave and family leave with return employment. Essential societal needs, largely unaddressed in the first aid package, while profitable industries were receiving emergency aid, must be attended to.  These would include support for childcare; school and after school care; support for bargaining units for laborers; and interest free lending to support  infrastructure grsowth and job creation.  The resources are available; the will to garner them needs to be exercised over increasingly divisive bipartisan bickering.

Learn More

Resistance Resources

Trump Administration Erodes US Environmental Protection Act Designed to Protect At-Risk Communities

Trump Administration Erodes US Environmental Protection Act Designed to Protect At-Risk Communities

Environmental Policy

July 22,2020

Trump Administration Erodes US Environmental Protection Act Designed to Protect At-Risk Communities

By Jacob Morton

Summary

Donald Trump has finalized a rollback of the nation’s “Magna Carta” of environmental protection policy, the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA). NEPA, signed into law 50 years ago by President Richard Nixon, requires government agencies to provide an environmental impact statement (EIS) for any proposed federal infrastructure project, such as building a pipeline or highway. The law requires full disclosure of the extent to which any project would impact the local environment, such as potential wildlife habitat disturbance, pollution of nearby water bodies, greenhouse gas emissions, and impacts on local communities. The law also plays an important role in allowing ample time for members of the public to provide input on how a federal infrastructure project will affect the health and safety of their community. Essentially, NEPA is the environmental law that requires an analysis of how any federal project will impact the environment and allows local citizens to express their concerns.

The Trump administration’s new version of the law is designed to speed up the permitting process for federal infrastructure projects. The new rule now requires a hard deadline of only “two years or less” for any environmental impact statement, shortening the review and public comment process by anywhere from 1-3 years. On average, federal environmental impact statements take 4.5 years to complete. Other revisions to the law now give federal agencies the ability to create their own categories of projects that they feel do not require an environmental impact review at all. On top of that, Trump’s new rule declares that environmental impact statements no longer need to consider a project’s “cumulative effects on climate change,” and instead, require only an analysis of any “reasonably foreseeable” impacts. This means federal projects no longer need to analyze and disclose how residual or secondary impacts resulting from the proposed project, will affect the regional environment or climate change over time.

Analysis

The oil and gas industry, along with many republican officials, have argued for years about the burdensome approval process required for federal development permits, and complain about the hurdles and delays that routinely result from pushback by environmental groups who claim violations of the NEPA law. Donald Trump himself has complained of his own frustrations as a real estate developer, having to comply with the law, which he calls a “ridiculous process” and “the single biggest obstacle to infrastructure projects.” White House officials say, “The new regulations will modernize, simplify and accelerate the environmental review process necessary to build a wide range of projects in the United States, including roads, bridges and highways.”

Despite the White House’s optimism, others view this to be an extremely dangerous, corrupt, and unethical move. Many consider the new rule to be anything but modern, rather a step backwards. Critics of the law’s revisions say, “it could sideline the concerns of poor and minority communities impacted by those projects and discount their impact on climate change.” Sharon Buccino, a senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council, says that NEPA was designed to give communities that are disproportionately affected by pollution from federal projects, such as highways, pipelines and chemical plants, an opportunity to voice their concerns and have a say in the health and future of their communities. “NEPA gives poor and communities of color a say in the projects that will define their communities for decades to come. Rather than listen, the Trump administration’s plan aims to silence such voices,” says Buccino.

An important part of the public comment process is the opportunity for communities to suggest alternatives to the proposed project, such as a wind or solar system instead of an oil or gas pipeline. However, Trump’s new version of the law allows developers of these projects, who are applying for the necessary permits, “to limit the range of alternatives that can be considered, while communities seeking to challenge a project will now need to offer far more onerous critiques.” Kym Hunter, a senior attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center, describes how the new rule makes it harder for local communities to challenge these federal projects. She explains, “It requires comments to be really specific, to cite page numbers and be really technical in ways that can be really challenging for communities. They may need to hire people to write their letters, if they can afford to do that.”

Opponents to the new rule view its elimination of the requirement to consider the cumulative effects of a project, to be particularly dangerous. “Cumulative effects” largely equates to how a project will contribute to climate change over time. For instance, the cumulative effects of building a new highway would include not just the environmental damage from the road itself, but also the impact from all the greenhouse gas emitting vehicles that will drive on it, and how this added pollution will compound upon the pollution already occurring from the existing roadways in the area. “This idea of cumulative impacts is really core to the way NEPA works,” says President Obama’s former head of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, Christy Goldfuss … “and arguably there is no greater environmental crisis that is tied to cumulative impacts than climate change. Because it’s really about greenhouse gases on top of greenhouse gases and other pollution adding up to this global disaster that we’re all experiencing.”

According to Trump’s new rule, only the damage caused by the road itself is required to be considered and disclosed. Not accounting for the cumulative effects of these projects greatly endangers the “poor communities and communities of color that are disproportionately selected as the site for polluting industries and projects.” Gina McCarthy, president and CEO of the Natural Resources Defense Council, argues “People have a right to weigh in before a highway project tears up their neighborhood or a pipeline goes through their backyard. Steamrolling their concerns will mean more polluted air, more contaminated water, more health threats and more environmental destruction.” McCarthy says, “Now more than ever our leaders should be helping people breathe easier, not handing out favors to oil drillers, pipeline developers and other polluters.” Brett Hartl of the Center for Biological Diversity says of the new rule, “This may be the single biggest giveaway to polluters in the past 40 years,” and Greenpeace USA calls it “a blatant attempt to silence the working-class communities of color [who were] resisting the expansion of fossil fuel infrastructure.”

Hartl expresses the fears many have of the new rule when he says, “NEPA’s dismantling is a win for corruption, a win for polluters, and a win for those that profit off the destruction of our planet. Everyone else loses.” Belinda Archibong, an assistant professor of economics at Barnard College of Columbia University also argues that the Trump administration is doing the opposite of what it should if it really wants to improve the economy. Considering that air pollution makes whole communities more susceptible to the coronavirus, the President should be imposing more environmental restrictions, not less. She says, “Saying ‘We’re going to pull back on regulation’ does not mean that firms are going to start hiring more people. That’s complete nonsense. All that’s going to happen is it’s going to lead to more pollution, period.” Rep. Nanette Diaz Barragán (D-Calif.) says, “With today’s Trump administration rule, fossil fuel corporations will be able to ram harmful projects through without considering the pollution dangers to people in nearby neighborhoods. NEPA gives our very vulnerable communities across the country an opportunity to make our voices heard and stop pollution in our own backyards. President Trump is trying to rob us of our voice. We will not be silenced.” Environmental groups plan to challenge the administration’s revisions in court and presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has vowed to reverse such rollbacks if he is elected.

Resistance Resources

  • Documented is a watchdog group that investigates how corporations manipulate public policy, harming our environment, communities, and democracy. https://documented.net/

Natural Resources Defense Council

  • Works to safeguard the earth – its people, its plants and animals, and the natural systems on which all life depends. Combining the power of more than three million members and online activists with the expertise of some 700 scientists, lawyers, and policy advocates across the globe to ensure the rights of all people to the air, the water, and the wild. https://www.nrdc.org/

Greenpeace USA

  • Greenpeace is a global, independent campaigning organization that uses peaceful protest and creative communication to expose global environmental problems and promote solutions that are essential to a green and peaceful future. https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/

Center for Biological Diversity

  • At the Center for Biological Diversity, we believe that the welfare of human beings is deeply linked to nature — to the existence in our world of a vast diversity of wild animals and plants. Because diversity has intrinsic value, and because its loss impoverishes society, we work to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. We do so through science, law, and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters and climate that species need to survive. https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/

Learn More

The Corruption of Jared Kushner

The Corruption of Jared Kushner

USRN Corruption Blog Post 

The Corruption Blog  digs into the details of the all-encompassing corruption of the Trump administration. 

Post #18 The Corruption of Jared Kushner 

By Sean Gray

July 20, 2020

Jared Kushner is Donald Trump’s son-in-law and the father of three of his grandchildren. He has stayed in the president’s good graces despite numerous political mishaps and public relations hits. The pair have much in common besides a shared workspace. Both are the sons of wealthy New York real estate magnates, the source of most of their wealth. Both have relied on their lofty beginnings to propel them to tremendous riches and influence. And both, since 2017, have used their Executive Branch positions to further enrich themselves at the expense and /or neglect of the American public.

Kushner’ qualifications for Senior Adviser to the president are questionable at best. He graduated with Honors (as did 90% of his class) from Harvard in 2003. However his curious acceptance to the school was investigated by ProPublica editor Daniel Golden for his 2006 book ‘’The Price of Admission’’, which focused on American elites buying their offspring into prestigious institutions. Golden spoke to officials at Kushner’s high school alma mater who told him bluntly, ‘’there was no way anyone in the administrative office thought [he would get in on merit]’’. The same official expressed disappointment that other more deserving students who applied were excluded. Charles Kushner, Jared’s dad, sat on Harvard’s fund raising-related Committee on University Resources and in 1998 (the year before his son’s admission) pledged a $2.5 million gift to be paid in ten annual installments of $250,000. Harvard does not comment on individuals applicants and the Kushner family has denied any connection between the tax-deductible gift and Jared’s acceptance.

Kushner began in the real estate business while attending college, selling rental properties in nearby Somerville, Massachusetts. When his father was imprisoned for tax fraud, Jared took the reins of the family business at the age of 26. Like Trump before him, Kushner sought to expand his father’s real estate empire and set his sights on Manhattan. His purchase of the 666 5th avenue  building in New York for a then-record $1.8 billion represents one of the biggest financial boondoggles in the city’s history. The exorbitant (and unprompted) bid greatly expanded  Kushner Company’s acquisitions, but also greatly amplified its risk. The property was greatly over leveraged (Kushner put down only $50 million in equity) and steadily lost money from the time of its purchase. When Brookfield properties effectively bought the building in 2018, it paid $1.28 billion, or roughly two-thirds of what Kushner paid a decade earlier.

More recently,Westminster Managements, owned by the Kushner company, is currently being sued by Maryland’s attorney general for ‘’hundreds of thousands’’ of unsanitary and unsafe conditions in its Baltimore units. The suit also alleges that the company has victimized tenants ‘’at all stages of offering and leasing’’. Westminster Management has also continued its predatory practices in spite of the Covid-19 pandemic. While millions of Americans have found themselves furloughed or fired, The Kushner Co. has with cruel indifference served tenants with lawsuits, debt collections and eviction notices.

When Kushner was appointed to a presidential  Senior Adviser role he immediately requested ‘’Top Secret’’ clearance. Top secret is the highest designation and is intended to shield information that ‘’unauthorized disclosure [of] could reasonably be expected to damage national security’’. On the forms submitted to make the request, Kushner omitted multiple foreign contacts which raised the specter of possible conflicts of interest. He offered the explanation that a member of his staff had prematurely ‘’hit send’’ on an incomplete form. No mention was made of an attempt to retrieve the form. When he resubmitted his application, under the section ‘’foreign contacts’’ Kushner included a 2016 meeting he attended at Trump Towers with agents of the Russian government offering dirt on political opponent, Hilary Clinton.  The meeting made him a subject of the Mueller Investigation.

Federal law does not require Executive Branch employees to divest of assets, but they must be recused from a matter when ‘’it would have a direct or predictable effect on the employee’s financial interests or certain interest that are treated as that of their own, [including] those of a spouse. Kushner’s personal holdings and stake in his family business likely represent conflicts under both provisions. On their federal disclosure forms, Kushner and Ivanka Trump list assets in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Of Kushner’s real estate holdings, a number were secured with significant capital from foreign investors. He is personally liable for several loans on his properties. Given his wide portfolio of government responsibilities, many in the realm of foreign policy, it stands to reason that Kushner should have either been made to divest  such assets, or recuse himself from a good deal of the activities of his office.

Kushner also was a beneficiary of the CARES Act Paycheck Protection Program . A crucial part of the coronavirus relief legislation, it was intended to keep small businesses afloat while they remained shuttered or hindered. Public outcry led to the disclosure of three Kushner companies and other wealthy individuals connected to the White House receiving aid. The New York Observer, which Kushner had previously operated, and is still run by his brother-in-law, was approved for a loan in the $350,000-$1,000,000 range. As was the subsidiary of Kushner Co. Esplanade Livingston LLC. Princeton Forestal, in which his family owns a 40% share, was approved for a loan in the $1-2 million dollar range.

Jared Kushner, and other real estate investors also stand to reap  benefit from the CARES Act based on a back-door provision in the bill. Section 2034 pertains to corporate taxes and allows businesses to write off all net operating losses incurred going back five years. The previous cap on deductions of that nature was capped at $500,00, per 2017’s  Tax Cuts and Job Acts. The provision is expected to disproportionately benefit the wealthiest Americans, especially those invested in real estate.

In 2018, Kushner was tasked with brokering peace talks between Israel and Palestine. He has been given an outsized role in the federal administration’s response to the coronavirus. Both times he was spectacularly ill-prepared for the challenges. Neither of the efforts have gone well, as continued tumult between the Middle Eastern countries and surging rates of Covid infection in the US can attest  Yet Kushner has stayed in this role for which he is unsuited while his business conflicts-of-interest have gone unchallenged.

Trump’s Incumbent Powers Are Losing Their Strength

Trump’s Incumbent Powers Are Losing Their Strength

Presidential Campaign Update 

The Presidential campaign update regularly provides USRN readers with updates on the newsworthy activities of November 2020 presidential candidates Donald J Trump (Republican) and Joseph R Biden (Democrat)

Brief # 5 Trump’s Incumbent Powers Are Losing Their Strength

By Iryna Shkurhan

July 20, 2020

Trump’s incumbent advantages, money and the power of the presidency, are losing their strength as his mistakes pile up and former supporters turn their backs. Four months before election day, Trump is trailing Biden in almost every poll nationally, and in key swing states. And while Biden’s team out-raised Trump’s in the past two quarters, the President’s reelection campaign believes its cash-on-hand edge and hiring head start puts him ahead with voters.

The Candidates

Joe Biden has surpassed President Trump in fundraising over the past two months, without hosting any in person events. Jointly with the Democratic National Committee, $282 million was raised for the presumptive democratic nominee’s campaign. Compared to the $266 million that Trump and the Republican National Committee raised in the same period.

While Biden has transitioned his campaign to the virtual realm with online operations to avoid the risks of courting voters in person, Trump’s reelection campaign hasn’t let the ongoing pandemic stop him from hosting in-person events. His first campaign rally was held in Tulsa, Oklahoma despite recommendations from health experts against an indoor event where masks and social distancing were not required. The turnout was significantly less than expected as the stadium was not close to full capacity. Two weeks later, reports of an uptick of covid cases in Tulsa county were attributed to the rally.

A recent national poll shows Biden leading by 15%, while last month the same poll showed Trump behind by 8% only. Polls coming out of Texas reveal that it stands to become a swing state this election with Trump at 46%, and Biden polling at 45% approval . The presumptive Democratic nominee  has an edge in five swing states- Arizona, Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

The president’s poll numbers on his handling of the coronavirus and civil unrest regarding racial injustice are also significantly low. With these two dominant issues confronting the nation, Americans are viewing the president’s response as insufficient and detrimental to the crises at hand.

As the country sees rises in coronavirus cases in 39 states, the President’s lack of response and denial of the severity of the crisis is costing him supporters, and American lives. After months of refusal to wear a mask, Trump finally wore one (for a day during a visit to an army hospital) after more than 140,000 Americans have died from the virus.

Even as the majority of Americans report not wanting Trump for a second term, many progressive voters are hesitant to vote for Biden. He has failed to get behind progressive issues that are in the forefront of the political conversation today. The main one being defunding the police- redirecting funds from the police to other services- which the majority of Americans support.

But this week Biden aligned his policy initiatives with progressive ideals by unveiling his plans for dealing with climate change in a live broadcasted speech. He revealed plans to increase the scale and urgency or investments in clean energy and water, while creating millions of union jobs in the process. One important pledge was to ensure that 40% of the economic benefits from his proposed clean energy initiative go toward disadvantaged communities.

Despite Biden leading the polls by wide margins, even in swing states, many voters are still concerned about the surprise of the last presidential election repeating itself. Election day in 2016 was a wake-up call which confirmed that polls are not always accurate.

The Conventions

The Democratic party has announced that the 2020 nominating Convention will be held mostly virtually starting on August 17. The event in Milwaukee has been scaled back to include only 300 people, with delegates receiving authorization to vote by email.

The Republican Convention, which is scheduled to start on August 24 in Jacksonville, Florida, is being scaled back as coronavirus cases in Florida reach new peaks.  Total attendance has been limited to 7,000 people, with 2,500 of them being delegates. It’s in sharp contrast from measures the democratic party is taking in response to the pandemic.

Echoes of a Massacre: White Supremacy Rears its Head in Wilmington

Echoes of a Massacre: White Supremacy Rears its Head in Wilmington

By Laura Plummer

July 17, 2020

“People are trapped in history and history is trapped in them.” – James Baldwin

On June 4, a sergeant with the Wilmington Police Department in Wilmington, NC, was conducting a routine audit of patrol cameras when she came across on-duty policemen using shockingly racist language while they believed the camera was off. Corporal Jesse Moore and Officers James Gilmore and Kevin Piner referred to black people as “negroes” and n——s, disparaged blacks in positions of power, talked about purchasing assault rifles so they could “go out and start slaughtering”, and said they were “ready” for a “civil war” to “wipe ‘em off the map.”

The sergeant quickly moved the tape up the chain of command and, on June 23, the trio was fired. In a statement, Chief Donny Williams called their comments “brutally offensive” but urged the public to not “judge our officers based on the conduct of a few.”

The “bad apple defense” is a common refrain when individual authority figures are exposed for wrongdoings. We are told that these cops do not represent the majority of law enforcement. The fact that the sergeant turned over the tapes immediately and that the men involved were summarily terminated does bode well for the WPD’s anti-racist internal culture, especially as the tapes had not leaked to the press and so could not become the target of public outrage. In addition, Chief Williams created an action plan both to hold the officers accountable and to prevent similar incidents from recurring.

But what is particularly noteworthy about this incident is the actual language used, language that is not only racist, but genocidal. The mention of a race war is common rhetoric used by radical white supremacist groups. This violent fantasy and the casual way in which the officers discussed it recall a period in the city’s history that is less about bad apples and more about a rotten tree.

Or in this case, a forest.

If you’ve never heard of the Wilmington Massacre of 1898, you’re not alone. It’s not a staple of school history curricula, despite the powerful impact it had on the spread of white supremacy throughout the south. This is due in part to the fact that, up until recently, the event was portrayed as a race riot incited by blacks. It’s now well documented that it was a calculated white supremacist c’oup d’état.

In 1898, Wilmington was the largest city in the state with about 25,000 residents, 56 percent of them black. Its black and white coalition government was neither Republican nor Democrat, but Fusionist. Blacks held public office, owned businesses, published a newspaper, worked as skilled craftsmen and even served in law enforcement.

This enraged Democrats (the parties were the opposite of what they are today), who had governed North Carolina since Reconstruction and who didn’t want to see former slaves and their offspring in positions of power. They began planning how they could overthrow the biracial government in Wilmington and deprive blacks of their rights to vote and to hold office.

They initiated a news campaign of racist propaganda painting blacks as incompetent and a sexual threat to white women. The campaign was meant to appeal to poor and working-class whites in North Carolina, to turn them against their black neighbors. White southerners were all too eager to have a scapegoat for their near-total dispossession following the Civil War. The Democrats won back the state legislature from the Republicans in November. However, Wilmington had elected a white Republican mayor and a black alderman.

Two days later, two thousand members of the Red Shirts, a paramilitary branch of the Democratic Party, descended on the city. Armed with machine guns, they burned down the public records office and the black newspaper, forced office holders to resign and shot dead at least 60 black men. Many more were wounded and thousands of black families fled. White sympathizers were banished.

Despite calls for Washington to intervene and seek justice, President McKinley turned a blind eye. White newspapers across the country adopted the narrative that the riot had been incited by blacks, and this version was codified in the collective consciousness. Almost overnight, Wilmington went from a majority black egalitarian southern city to a white stronghold that would endure for decades. Blacks in Wilmington were literally “wiped off the map.”

Over 120 years and a two-term black president later, three white uniformed officers were caught on video espousing many of the same sentiments as Carolinian Democrats did at the turn of the 20th century. While the very public killings of black citizens by police have mobilized a nation, even more insidious are the conversations that go on behind closed doors among those in positions of authority when (they think) the cameras aren’t rolling.

Learn More:

  • Wilmington’s Lie: The Murderous Coup of 1898 and the Rise of White Supremacy, David Zucchino
  • Personal Interview, Andrew Thornebrooke, Author of The Rearguard, July 09, 2020
ICE Rescinds Order to Deport International Students – an Update to Brief #98

ICE Rescinds Order to Deport International Students – an Update to Brief #98

July 17, 2020

Policy Summary

The July 6 Directive from the Trump Administration covered in Brief 98 faced immediate backlash and swift legal action by institutions of higher learning, municipalities, and tech companies. Within two days, Harvard and MIT sued the government in Federal Court to have the Directive reversed and declared unlawful, touting it “arbitrary and capricious.” Many colleges and universities expressed their support for the legal challenge and hoped for a similar outcome. Several schools had begun to adapt their fall semester plans with the original Directive in mind in a fashion that would retain their international students, such as hybrid instruction as well as offering one-on-one sessions for international students. Last week, the Administration agreed to rescind their original directive and implementation and changed the ICE rule.

Analysis

As expressed in Brief 98, international students not only enrich the American higher learning system, but also play a large financial role in funding the institutions. As a result of the original Directive, professors and educators across a wide array of institutions began planning their learning around the Directive in a way that would ensure their international students would still be able to receive instruction in the US. These institutions had not only a financial prerogative to enlist hybrid learning styles, but a moral one as well. The reversal of the Directive further proves the important role education plays in the American Dream as well as the power of academic institutions to keep that dream alive.

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.
  • Border Network for Human Rights: network to engage education, organization and participation of border communities to defend human rights and work towards a society where everyone is equal in rights and dignity.
  • World Health Organization: the WHO provides updated information surrounding COVID-19 and global responses
  • Center for Disease Control: the CDC provides updated information surrounding COVID-19 and the US responses
x
x
Support fearless journalism! Your contribution, big or small, dismantles corruption and sparks meaningful change. As an independent outlet, we rely on readers like you to champion the cause of transparent and accountable governance. Every donation fuels our mission for insightful policy reporting, a cornerstone for informed citizenship. Help safeguard democracy from tyrants—donate today. Your generosity fosters hope for a just and equitable society.

Pin It on Pinterest