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

Rescinded Environmental Policies and how they will impact the Economy

Brief #99—Environment
By Shannon Q. Elliott
According to the Trump Administration they have been successful in “cutting the red tape” of Obama era environmental policies and protections.

Two New Twists In The Saga of The 2020 Census; October 2020

Brief #139—Civil Rights
By Rod Maggay
On October 13, 2020 the United States Supreme Court issued an order that stayed an order from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that upheld the suspension of the September 30, 2020 deadline for finishing the 2020 census count. And, on October 16, 2020 the Supreme Court announced that it had set for argument on November 30, 2020 to consider whether the census can exclude undocumented immigrants from the overall tally of persons.

The Trump Administration Threatens Hospital Funding Over COVID-19 Reporting

Brief #82—Health
By Taylor J Smith
After the Trump Administration’s July announcement requiring all hospitals to submit COVID-19 data to private company, TeleTracking Technologies, exclusively sharing data with the Department of Health and Human Services, critics opposed the White House’s move to bypass the Centers for Disease Control, raising transparency concerns. However, the requirements have continued, and President Trump has become dissatisfied with the level of compliance amongst the nation’s hospitals.

Steven Crowder and Sam Seder’s take on the Amy Coney Barrett Nomination

Brief #3—Media Blog
By John McCabe
With just two weeks until the General Election, coverage of the Amy Coney Barrett hearing has dominated the web.

Education in the Time of Covid — Part 5: How Effective is Virtual learning?

Brief #49—Education
By Emily Carty
The pandemic has forced many educational institutions to move towards virtual learning, or at least some form of distance education, in an extremely short time-frame.

The Corruption of Ivanka Trump

Brief #25—Corruption Blog
By Sean Gray
The Corruption Blog digs into the details of the all-encompassing corruption of the Trump administration.

The Corona Virus Crisis Women in the Labor Force

Brief #95—Economic Policy
By Rosalind Gottfried
Women are leaving the workforce at a rate four times than that of men.

How Foreign Countries Are Hacking the US Election

Brief #94—Foreign Policy
By Brandon Mooney
Although some of us may have missed it with all of the covid-19 news, in early August, U.S. intelligence reported to Congress that Russia, China, and Iran were attempting to interfere in the 2020 presidential election.

« Older Entries

Next Entries »

Senator Collins Faces Strong Challenge from Speaker Gideon

2020 Congressional Campaign Updates is a new feature of U.S. RESIST NEWS. Written by reporter William Bourque, the updates will help our leaders follow key races in the House and Senate that are key to the ability of democrats to gain control of both houses of Congress.

Update # 2 Senator Collins Faces Strong Challenge from Speaker Gideon

June 1, 2020

Susan Collins has long been respected as a moderate and fair Senator her entire career, that is, until she sold out her constituents and voted for Brett Kavanaugh. This was the final straw for many moderate Mainers who may now plan to cast their vote for Maine Speaker of the House Sara Gideon, a progressive democrat from Freeport, ME.

Gideon is a second-generation American who was the leader of the push against Paul LePage, the state’s former Republican governor. Gideon is seen as the likely choice for the democratic nomination by many in the state and, after announcing her candidacy on June 24, 2019, Gideon raised over 1 million dollars in the first week of her campaign. Since then, Gideon has out-fundraised Collins by about 1.5 million dollars, with about 43% of those donations coming from small, individual contributions. On the Collins side, only 10% of donations have been smaller individual contributions, and about 80% of the candidates money has come from large individual donations and PAC’s. This has to be alarming to many Mainers, who have seen Collins as a senator by the people, for the people. However, as the nation and Maine’s political landscapes have changed, Collins has too, becoming more partisan and taking a significantly larger amount of money from PAC’s and larger individual donors.

Delving a bit deeper into the candidates financial backings, opensecrets.org reports that Votesane PAC has been the largest contributor to the Collins campaign, putting $116,325 into Collins at this point in the campaign. Gideon, on the other hand, had her largest donation from EMILY’s List, a nonprofit that supports progressive women running for Congress. Gideon has already garnered an endorsement from the organization, so it’s no surprise to see them as her leading donor. Gideon looks to keep up the pressure on Collins, financially at least, as she raised 7.1 million dollars during the first quarter of 2020, reports the Portland Press Herald.

Although Gideon isn’t the official nominee, with a July 14th primary still to claim that, Gideon seems to have garnered a significant amount of support from the Democratic establishment in Washington, who understand the importance of Senator Collins to her party. This election cycle marks a potentially historic moment for the state of Maine, who could be represented by a congressional contingent that doesn’t include a Republican for the first time since before the Civil War. Polls suggest that this may not come to fruition, with District 2 Representative Jared Golden facing a hard fight in a district Trump won in 2016. With the senate race however, local and national polls show that Gideon may be a step ahead of the incumbent, with the Bangor Daily News reporting that a poll done by Victory Geek shows Gideon with a 9 point lead. Most experts suggest that this race is key in the Democratic strategy to take control of the senate, which will most certainly mean money from across the country may be funneled into this race by Democrats and Republicans alike. The battle for the senate is just heating up and this race in Maine is one to watch for an indication of how the rest of the country may vote in presidential and congressional elections alike.

2020 Congressional Campaign Updates

An Overview of Key 2020 Senate Races

Update # 1: An Overview of Key 2020 Senate Races

June 1,2020

6 Key Races for the Democrats to flip the Senate

The control of the Senate has been one of the key ways in which President Trump has wreaked havoc on the United States and our democracy, and the Democratic Party would like nothing more than to snatch it from the Republican’s hands this fall. With the nation at such a volatile point with both Covid-19, large-scale unemployment, and the recent killings of people of color at the hands of police officers, it has become evident that the elections of 2020 may shape the course of our nation for many years. The Republican Party currently holds the Senate 53 to 47, as well as holding the tie breaking vote in Vice President Pence.

270towin, an election tracking website, rates four 2020 Senate races as toss-ups. Arizona, Maine, North Carolina, and Colorado are four states that have vulnerable Republican incumbents with strong Democratic challengers, who have all received significant financial support from national democratic organizations. John Hickenlooper, the challenger from Colorado, garners the most national attention, having been governor for 7 years and having briefly placed himself in the running for the Democratic presidential nomination. The challenger in Arizona, Mark Kelly, is known for being an astronaut and the husband of shooting survivor Gabrielle Giffords. He has run his campaign on a moderate platform that isn’t in favor of the Green New Deal. The challenger from North Carolina is Cal Cunningham, a former member of the Army Reserves who has criticized incumbent Thom Tillis for voting to remove coverage from the Affordable Care Act for individuals with pre-existing conditions. The final challenger is Sara Gideon, from Maine, who is running against Susan Collins. Gideon served as the Maine Speaker of the House and has focused on not taking PAC and big-money donations. It seems she has succeeded in this mission, as 43% of her funding is from donations under 200 dollars.

All of these races are integral to the Democratic push to flip the senate, as a win in all of these races would pull the senate 51-49, in favor of the democrats. However, it is worth noting that a few democrats are also at risk of losing their seats. The most well-known of these is Doug Jones, from Alabama, who defeated Roy Moore, who was accused by 9 different women of unwanted sexual advances. Jones’s election marks the first time since the early 90’s that a democrat has been elected to the senate in Alabama, showing how difficult the state has been for democrats. Jones faces a tough competitor in either Tommy Tuberville, former University of Alabama football coach, or Jeff Sessions, who stepped down from the senate to be appointed Attorney General in 2017. On the other hand, Montana is a state where the democrats look to flip back, with incumbent Steve Daines running against Montana governor Steve Bullock, who won re-election in 2016. Daines hasn’t been a particularly notable senator, with most of his votes staying within party lines. It is worth mentioning that Daines initially endorsed Marco Rubio for president in 2016, potentially alienating Trump supporters in his home state. Montana was one of two states, the other being North Carolina, that Trump won but also elected democratic governors in 2016.

All in all, there are many races to watch this election season, but the hopeful democratic control of the senate may fall into the hands of voters in these six races. The campaign pages of all the democratic candidates will be linked below, if you wish to learn more.

The Latest on Trump’s Tax Returns

By Sean Gray

June 1, 2020

The Supreme Court is set to determine the fate of Donald Trump’s taxes case by session’s end in late June. Condensed into one case for the sake of expediency are lawsuits filed on the president’s behalf against subpoenas from the House of Representatives and the Manhattan District Attorney’s office. Congress has subpoenaed documents, including Trump’s tax returns from his financial institutions. Manhattan’s DA sent a grand jury subpoena to two of Trump’s banks as part of an ongoing investigation into financial crimes by the eponymous organization.

Trump’s lawyers have argued that Congress’ request serve no legitimate legislative purpose. As for the NY subpoena, his lawyers have made the audacious claim that a sitting president has immunity from investigation. Neither argument has held up in three lower or appeals courts. The decision of the justices promise to have far-reaching consequences. The ideologically divided court found flaw in the cases presented by both sides when arguments were held last month. A reversal of the previous court’s decision threatens to pull the country in a decidedly dictatorial direction.

Right or wrong, Congress has had its eye on Trump since he took office. He ascended the presidency amid foreign election interference and has been accused of myriad dirty dealings. His supporters have long viewed this oversight as bitter harassment. His lawyer’s arguments fall along those lines. To prevent their clients tax returns from seeing the light of day, Trump’s legal team have argued that the subpoenas are politically motivated and lack legitimate legislative purpose. History is not on their side. Precedent dictates Congress may legislate wherever it is needed.

The subpoenas issued by the Manhattan DA are more like a straightforward criminal investigation. They were originally served by the federal court’s Southern New York district, who moved on from the case at the request of the Justice Department. Cyrus Vance, the Manhattan prosecutor and named plaintiff in the case, took the reins. Also issued in the wake of Michael Cohen’s testimony, the subpoenas seek eight years of tax returns from Trump and the organization that bears his family name. Trump’s lawyer’s arguments against the subpoenas posits that a president is shielded even from investigation while holding office. Like so much that has been said in defense of the indefensible in the last four years, this is dangerous nonsense. Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton both made sweeping claims of executive privilege when they found themselves in legal hot water. Nixon claimed the tapes Watergate prosecutors wanted in charging presidential aides fell under executive privilege. Clinton argued he was immune from a civil lawsuit for sexual harassment while in office. Both president’s lost their court battles. The president may be immune from litigation which would pull focus from his enormous responsibilities, but none has been ruled above the law. A deviation from precedent would place Trump exactly there. Given his proclivity for law-breaking and lack of accountability, it’s frightening to imagine how Trump might respond having that status conferred upon him.

The legal challenges mounted by the president’s attorneys are likely to fail. At this juncture it would take a remarkable reversal of decades of precedent to allow Trump to keep his records private. While the legal legitimacy of the subpoenas are at issue in court, the political ramifications cannot be ignored. The impact of the case may well depend on timing. When the Supreme Court adjourns for the summer, they’re under no obligation to render a final verdict and may elect to send the case back to a lower court for re-deliberation or in search of the a ‘’limiting principle’’ to justify any restraint on Congressional oversight. Such a move would have little effect on the case’s ultimate outcome, but would delay its conclusion until after the election. It could in fact, render the court’s decision moot

Voters in a functioning democracy ought to know whether a candidate was engaged in ongoing criminal behavior prior to casting a ballot. They should also know if the ‘’successful businessman’’ running for office has any entanglements, foreign or domestic which may represent a conflict of interest. A releasing of Trump’s tax returns will enable voters to make an informed judgment about this matter. Smart money says Trump will have to produce some, or all of the documents requested of him. More pressing is what, if any impact the decision may have on the 2020 election.

Learn More

California GOP Wrongly Takes Up Voter Mail Fraud Issue In California Lawsuit

Policy Summary: In April 2020 President Donald J. Trump again claimed that mail – in ballots encouraged cheating and dishonesty with state voting processes. On May 24, 2020 The Republican National Committee and a number of other GOP groups filed a lawsuit in the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of California in an effort to stop California Governor Gavin Newsom’s May 8, 2020 executive order to send all California voters a mail – in ballot for the upcoming November 3, 2020 election.

Governor Newsom’s executive order sets forth three things – [1] that each state county election officials shall deliver vote – by – mail ballots to all registered voters who are eligible to vote in the November 3, 2020 election, [2] that no limits will be placed on in – person voting opportunities that are feasible, and [3] that Governor Newsom’s administration will continue to partner with the Secretary of State and the Legislature to explore in – person voting opportunities as well as other details for the November 2020 election. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE

Policy Analysis: Once again, as in recent state elections in Wisconsin in 2020 and North Carolina in 2018 have shown, the Republican Party is attempting to manipulate the issue of absentee and mail – in ballots to suppress votes.

First, the contention in the California lawsuit that vote by mail “invites fraud” and “illegitimate voting” is simply a false assertion that has already been debunked numerous times. In an extensive analytical piece by the Washington Post the article states that the issue is being used to advance a partisan agenda by the GOP even though some GOP figures publicly and privately question President Trump’s attacks on mail – in voting. Republican Senator Rick Scott of Florida praised the mail – in voting system in his state while frequent Trump critic and Republican Senator from Utah Mitt Romney said that a majority of his state participates in mail – in voting and that it has worked very well in Utah. State mail – in voting systems, when properly administrated and monitored, are an effective and reliable voting option.

What is not being mentioned is that Governor Newsom’s order is not moving the entire state voting system to a mail – in only system. His order was explicit that he and the Legislature were continuing to explore options with in – person voting and how to do that safely while in the midst of a pandemic. While Democrats have pushed for an expansion of mail – in voting during the pandemic they are also insistent that in – person voting options still be available. Voters could still have the option to vote in person or submit their ballot by mail. Current options, like in – person voting would not be eliminated. The voter would simply have more options to choose how they want to vote.

Finally, President Trump’s claims that that Democrats are encouraging voter fraud by pushing for mail – in ballot options is incredible when one considers the case of GOP operative Leslie Dowless in North Carolina, specifically in the 9th congressional district in that state. In that case, Mr. Dowless was charged with a number of felonies in connection with a scheme to improperly collect and tamper with the absentee ballots in a way that would give more votes to the Republican candidate for Congress from that district in the 2018 election. The end result was that the results of the 2018 election where the Republican narrowly won were voided. That caused the Republican candidate who “won” to step aside and another election to be held. The GOP cannot try to claim that mail – in voting causes fraud when one of their own operatives was caught engaging in a fraudulent scheme in the county’s absentee ballot voting system to help boost a Republican candidate’s chances. The GOP bringing a lawsuit in California to defend fair and honest voting options becomes suspect and exposes what the lawsuit is really about – an effort to discredit mail – in voting systems for partisan reasons, which at its core is nothing but another attempt to suppress votes. In this time where stepping outside to cast a ballot could mean the difference between life and death, the GOP would do better to find ways to help people vote instead of being an obstacle for voters who want to cast their ballot. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE

Engagement Resources:

Rock the Vote – non – profit group’s infopage on each state’s absentee ballot voting rules.
Vote at Home – non – profit group’s webpage advocating for voters to have the option to vote at home and with a collection of vote at home documents and success stories.
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) – article from notable website of comparative state laws arguing for both absentee and in – person voting options.
Center for American Progress – non – profit group article on why mail – in and in – person voting is essential for people of color.

This brief was compiled by Rod Maggay. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief, please contact Rod@USResistnews.org.

The Future is Green

Policy

Green jobs are the future in spite of heavy layoffs during this period of labor market contraction. Clean energy lost well over a half a million jobs since the virus hit the economy. This figure corresponds to 17% of industry jobs. In the state of California, where the loss was the most dramatic, 105,000 workers lost their jobs. Three years of job growth were eradicated in a month. These were in the areas of solar roof installation; wind turbine technicians; factory work building electric cars; and work in Energy Star appliances and high efficiency air conditioning. The Bureau of Labor Statistics projects solar installers and wind turbine technicians to be the fastest g rowing jobs in the next two years. Clean energy, with a workforce of 3.4 million, represents three times the workers of the fossil fuel industry. In spite of this disparity, as part of his response to the pandemic, Trump pledged to bolster the oil and gas industry by providing funds to insure future jobs. He made no similar announcement regarding clean air or renewable energy; he completely ignored the issue of climate control.

In contrast, there have been a wide range of economists, environmental advocates and policy makers who promote clean energy job as the essential economic sector of the future, both in response to employment and to the impending climate crisis. California governor Newsom convened a Business and Jobs Recovery task force and twenty states jumped on board urging clean air job creation. One in three jobs in construction utilizes non-fossil fuel electricity while fossil fuel related construction jobs represent only 13% of jobs. The New Green Deal, a program initiated by representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Ed Markey, supports federal jobs which support the transition to clean energy by promoting renewable energy projects; clean up at coal mines; increased mass transit construction; and other projects lowering the emissions of toxins.

Analysis

The New Green Deal can emulate the Works Progress Administration which put so many people to work in the depression in government funded jobs. FDR failed to renew that program because his advisors said that if he did so he would be unlikely to ever rescind it. But in today’s pandemic economy the importance of public jobs is highlighted. These jobs should be government work on green projects and other needed infrastructure work. They should pay a living wage and have benefits and health insurance (unless healthcare gets separated from employment). In the meantime, many policy experts are touting the Universal Basic Income (or guaranteed income) to help sustain citizens, and the economy, until employment can be revived. Not only is this beneficial to the economic sustenance of the society, it also speaks to the mental health of citizens. Unemployment has been shown to be correlated to suicide. Suicide is on the rise and, in some areas the so-called “deaths of despair” outnumber deaths from the virus.

Learn More

USDA Lets Biotech Companies Regulate Themselves

Policy:

In response to President Trump’s June 2019 executive order for the USDA, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Environmental Protection Agency took steps to streamline the process for approving biotech crops, including those produced by gene editing, the USDA has proposed the new SECURE Rule. This new rule will reduce USDA oversight and allow biotech companies to decide if their genetically modified plants/products need to be tested and regulated by the USDA. So, instead of the USDA testing and regulating all genetically modified/engineered plants before they are released for use, the biotech companies get to decide whether, or not, to recommend a product for review and regulation by the USDA.

If a biotech company decides a new product does not pose any risk as a future pest to other crops, then it may release that plant/product for use by the industry without even notifying the USDA. As a guide for which crops require government regulation and which crops do not, the new SECURE Rule essentially states that a new genetically engineered (GE) organism is exempt from government regulation if it:

a) was developed using material from an organism that is not a current plant pest
b) was engineered using “conventional breeding methods,” or
c) was modified by introduction of a “gene, allele, or structural variant” that came from a plant of the same species or of a species that is known to be compatible through “conventional breeding methods.”

“Conventional breeding methods” refers to methods of genetic engineering via wide genetic crosses, embryo rescue, or protoplast fusion. In short, these methods are performed, essentially, by introducing desired genetic factors into plant populations where they may be adopted by the plant population through the natural mutation processes plant populations undergo when exposed to certain factors and environments. If all goes well, some plants from the next generation will have naturally mutated to exhibit the desired traits. These methods are considered to produce low plant-pest risk organisms (meaning low risk of becoming a future major pest). Any genetically engineered plants that do not meet these criteria are still subject to USDA regulation…as long as the biotech companies that produce them are honest about their methods and/or choose to report the new product.

Analysis:

The new SECURE Rule has faced a lot of criticism from a broad range of interest groups. According to a statement from the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), “Despite a unified position from environmental groups, consumer organizations, biotech crop developers, and food industry stakeholders imploring USDA to eliminate a provision allowing crop developers to self-determine whether their products are regulated, the Trump administration refused to require developers to even notify the agency of products they believe are exempt under the new regulations.” The representatives of these interest groups, in a letter delivered to the USDA on March 6, 2020, asked that the agency at least include a process by which biotech companies must report any newly produced organisms. They wrote, “Independent of whether the final rule retains the self-determination provision, we strongly encourage the Agency to include in the final rule a process by which a developer is required to notify the Agency of a GE plant that the developer has determined meets one of the exemptions in proposed 340.1(b) or (c) prior to placement on the market.” The statement further explains that “This mandatory notification process would provide a developer with an opportunity to affirm that a GE plant meets an exemption, and it also would provide additional information to the marketplace and consumers.[…] By providing this additional information to consumers regarding what products are available in the market, the Agency is providing an opportunity to grow consumer confidence in the U.S. food supply.” Despite the USDA’s justification and EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler’s praise of the new rule for creating a faster path for the release of biotechnology, this coalition of interest group representatives ended their statement saying, “Many of our organizations hope for modification to the original proposal, we believe that USDA’s final rule should provide opportunities for transparency that can be achieved without limiting innovation or these new products’ potential benefits for society and the environment.”

Many fear that the USDA’s new rule is dangerous because it eliminates too many checks and balances on the biotech industry and its potential effects on our food supply. Aviva Glaser, director of agriculture policy at the National Wildlife Federation says, “There is a need for adequate safeguards and effective regulatory oversight to ensure that there aren’t unintended consequences to biodiversity from these new technologies, but unfortunately, USDA’s rule falls short of achieving this.” Gregory Jaffe, biotechnology project director for the CSPI, explains that “While some genetically engineered products are safe and beneficial, the federal government needs a regulatory system that tracks product development and ensures safety before products are marketed.” For the CSPI and of the new rule, he says, “We support science- and risk-based federal oversight of genetically engineered plants to ensure they are safe to humans and the environment before they are released for cultivation or restoration, but today’s final regulation does not achieve that result.”

Many, including Center for Food Safety senior attorney Sylvia Wu, feel it’s a good idea to update the legislation for regulating GMO products, that hasn’t been revised since 1987, but view the new SECURE Rule as simply another tactic by the Trump administration to “push through yet another industry-friendly policy that could have ramifications for the country’s food supply.” Instead of fixing the deficiencies and improving the efficiency and strength of the regulatory legislation, the Trump administration is simply cutting back regulation and oversight all together. Wu states that “the revised regulations dramatically scale back USDA’s regulatory authority, leaving most GMOs unregulated, [and] the new regulations finalized by USDA, paradoxically named the SECURE rule, are anything but secure.”

As Thomas Gremillion, director of food policy for the Consumer Federation of America puts it, the bottom line is this: “Consumers have a right to know how gene editing is being used to produce the foods they buy in the market. This rule will undermine public confidence in the food supply and ultimately set back beneficial uses of this technology.”

Resistance Resources:

Center for Science in the Public Interest

Founded in 1971, the Center for Science in the Public Interest is perhaps the oldest independent, science-based consumer advocacy organization with an impressive record of accomplishments and a clear and ambitious agenda for improving the food system to support healthy eating. https://cspinet.org/

National Wildlife Federation

America’s largest and most trusted conservation organization; works across the country to unite Americans from all walks of life in giving wildlife a voice. NWF has been on the front lines for wildlife since 1936, fighting for the conservation values that are woven into the fabric of our nation’s collective heritage. https://www.nwf.org/

Environmental Defense Fund

One of the world’s largest environmental organizations and a 501(c)(3) non-profit. Preserving the natural systems on which all life depends. https://www.edf.org/

Consumer Federation of America

The Consumer Federation of America (CFA) is an association of non-profit consumer organizations that was established in 1968 to advance the consumer interest through research, advocacy, and education. Today, more than 250 of these groups participate in the federation and govern it through their representatives on the organization’s Board of Directors. CFA is a research, advocacy, education, and service organization. https://consumerfed.org/

Sources Cited:

Cronin, J., & Adcock, R. (2020, May 14). Trump Administration’s USDA Limits Oversight of Genetically Engineered and Gene Edited Crops. Center for Science in the Public Interest. Retrieved May 25, 2020, from https://cspinet.org/news/trump-administration-usda-limits-oversight-genetically-engineered-and-gene-edited-crops
Erickson, B. E. (2020, May 15). USDA scales back oversight of GMO crops. C&EN Global Enterprise. Retrieved May 25, 2020, from https://cen.acs.org/biological-chemistry/biotechnology/USDA-scales-back-oversight-genetically-modified-crops/98/web/2020/05
Higgins, E. (2020, May 15). ‘Anything But Secure’: Advocates Decry USDA Rule Allowing Big Ag to Set Its Own Regulations on GMOs. Common Dreams. Retrieved May 25, 2020, from https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/05/15/anything-secure-advocates-decry-usda-rule-allowing-big-ag-set-its-own-regulations
O’Brian, D. (2020, March 6). Coalition Letter [To Office of Management and Budget]. 725 17th Street NW, Washington, D.C.
Movement of Certain Genetically Engineered Organisms, 7 CFR Parts 330, 340, and 372 Department of Agriculture § [Docket No. APHIS-2018-0034] RIN 0579-AE47 (2019).

Future Dismal for Young Workers

Policy

The economic outlook is bleak for new workers and for millennials who entered the labor force after the 2008 economic crisis. The employment rate for 20-24 year olds is down 25% from March to April and down 16% for 20-29 year olds. For workers without degrees, and for minority workers, the outlook is more pronounced. A report released just prior to the onslaught of the virus showed that young college graduates had unemployment rates greater than those for the general population but less than that suffered by those without a degree. It further showed that 41% of recent college graduates worked in jobs not requiring a college degree. Data from the 2008 economic crisis suggest that job losses and bouts of unemployment have a lasting impact on career trajectories and lifelong income. There is evidence that job insecurity and competition make people “risk averse,” and less likely to change jobs which may provide a promotion or more opportunities in the future. People who have come of age, between the ages of 18-25, in periods of economic downturn are more likely to believe in luck rather than effort as a significant element of success. Loss of income and poor job security are linked to a disinclination to marry or to have children. Millennials have suffered two unusually severe periods of economic crisis and its full impact on their adulthood is yet to be seen though, as a group, they are less well off at the same age when compared to Gen Xers and baby boomers..

New job seekers, particularly those from affluent families and with college degrees, can choose to sit out the labor market for a “gap year.” Pursuing an interest or hobby is not likely to reflect poorly on their potential and the labor market may be more favorable in the next year. Workers without the luxury of sitting out in their parents’ home and/or doing something other than unpaid work face debt, unpaid bills, and poor prospects. Workers who lose jobs and/or take jobs that are not the desired type will face long term fallout.

Analysis

One obvious help would be for the government to ensure that workers are not laid off but for many that ship has sailed. Preserving employment would lead to bills being paid and debt being attended to. Even a pay cut, coupled with student loan deferments, would leave new and young workers in a better position. Other policies should focus on helping retail, leisure, and hospitality industries where young people are likely to be disproportionately employed. One fear is that older people, past retirement age, who own shuttered businesses, may decide not to reopen adversely affecting the prospects of young workers. Politically, for some young workers who formerly aligned with the Republican Party and other moderates, there is some evidence that they are swinging progressive. Young people are strong supporters of Bernie and also of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and are impacting the platform of the Democrats. If the trend continues, it can mean a new political landscape.

Learn More:

Election Responses to the Pandemic: Mail-In Voting and Virtual Conventions

As more states move to expand mail-in voting ahead of the November election, President Trump hasn’t held back from expressing his disapproval of the proposced new measures. In alignment with the President, Republicans are also investing in efforts to make voting more inaccessible, citing voter fraud as a major concern. Joe Biden leads the President by a wide margin in many of the recent polls conducted on the 2020 presidential election.

Voting

President Trump attacked mail in voting, which 45 states currently allow, as fraudulent and potentially hurtful to his reelection efforts. Despite his baseless claims, state leaders are working to ensure the citizens can safety cast their ballots without risking their health.

The State Democratic Secretary of Michigan announced last week that all registered voters would receive an application in the mail to request an absentee ballot ahead of the general election. Following suit, a federal judge ruled that Texans have the right to request an absentee ballot if they fear compromising their health at the polls.

The Republican National Committee has pledged $20 million to fight democratic lawsuits that are seeking to ease voting restrictions. The New York Times reported that Republicans are also seeking to recruit 50,000 people in key battleground states to serve as “poll watchers” and deter voters who they believe are ineligible to vote.

Several studies have shown that neither Republicans nor Democrats have an unfair advantage with mail voting in place and despite the President’s claims, cases of voter fraud are exceedingly rare.

The Candidates

Joe Biden remains in the lead in national polls, and as of recently,and also leads in key swing states: Arizona, Florida, Virginia and Michigan. Despite sexual assault allegations from a woman named Tara Reade, many voters are essentially considering that President Trump has many sexual assault allegations, which didn’t deter his path to presidency.

Given that this is a re-election race, voters are mainly deciding if they want four more years of the Trump administration. For many, the Reade allegation does not seem like enough to sway voters in Trump’s favor.

A recent poll shows that out of the 55% of Americans who believe the accusation against Biden, 1 in 3 people would still vote for him in November. Experts believe that to beat an incumbent, only 5% of the work is convincing people you are capable, the rest is convincing them why your opponent should be voted out.

Presidential Convention
Social distancing measures aren’t likely to disappear any time soon, and for the first time in history, the Democratic National Convention may be virtual. Democrats are making plans for an online convention scheduled for this August to ensure delegates won’t be risking their health while performing their role.

The Democratic National Committee has already approved a social distancing friendly plan for the gathering that will inevitably confirm Biden as the party’s nominee. In response to progressive delegates dissatisfied with Biden as the party’s nominee, Sen. Sander’s campaign released a report outlining rules of conduct. The report barred delegates from attacking other candidates or party leaders at the convention and prior to it on social media.

Resistance Resources

When We All Vote– a nonpartisan organization committed to voter registration.
Brennan Center for Justice– an advocacy group that supports expanded mail voting as one way to insulate elections from the effects of the pandemic.
ACLU– a nonprofit organization fighting voter suppression and promoting access to the ballot.

U.S. RESIST NEWS Endorses Joe Biden for President

In this, the most important Presidential election in the history of our country, U.S. RESIST NEWS is pleased to endorse Joe Biden for President. We are confident that Biden’s experience and strong character will enable him to defeat President Trump in the November Presidential election.

Joe Biden is the winner of the vast majority of state democratic primaries held thus far. He has amassed 1,507 democratic convention delegates, compared to his closest rival Bernie Sanders who has 984. Biden has received 63.3% of all primary votes cast (286,065). Sanders has received 16.5 % (74,755)

Biden has held senior US government policy-maker positions since 1972. He served as US Senator from the state of Delaware and was re-elected 6 times. He also served as United States Vice-President in the administration of President Barack Obama from 2009 to 2017.

Over the course of his career Biden has played key roles in the development and implementation of legislation that addresses the key public policy domains covered by USRRESIST News, including civil rights, gender equity, health, education, the environment, gun control, immigration, and foreign policy.

He has extensive experience dealing with the two most pressing problems currently facing the United States: a global pandemic (Biden led the Obama administration’s efforts to combat Ebola virus), and an economic recession/depression (Biden helped lead economic recovery efforts that brought us back from the financial crisis of 2008).

Joe Biden also is a man of character known for his honesty, integrity, and compassion. Because he has been through so many personal hardships (the loss of his first wife and young child and later an older son), he has developed an ability to empathize with American going through hardship and loss as so many now are.

Recently there has been an unproven allegation that Biden, 28 years ago, sexually assaulted a Congressional staffer named Tara Reade. Biden has denied doing this, and continually responds to questions about the incident. He has said that he believes in the right of women to express themselves about such incidents and their right to a full investigation into what has been alleged. This response indicates Biden takes such allegations seriously and addresses them in a forthright manner. President Trump on the other hand has cursorily dismissed the more than 12 allegations of sexual assault and rape that have been lodged against him.

Supporting Joe Biden is the right thing to do at this time. The other major democratic candidates for President have endorsed Biden. They sense, as do we, that there is a need for democrats to close ranks in this election. For the past four years President Trump has conducted an assault on our democratic institutions and the rule of law. He has debased the role of president and divided our country at a time when we need to be united.

Joe Biden has the ability to unite America. He can appeal to disaffected voters in mid-America swing states, liberal and moderate elements in the Democratic party, and key elements of the Democratic base, such as African Americans and women. This ability to connect with the different Democratic party constituencies suggests that large numbers of voters will turn out in support of him on election day. A large turnout will help ensure that the Democrats capture the White House, as well as Capitol Hill.

Go Joe go! We’re behind you.

The President and The Scientists

The Coronavirus Government Watch Blog is a new U.S. RESIST NEWS blog post written by Sean Gray. The Post provides information and analysis of the federal government’s response to the coronavirus. Wherever possible we seek to be supportive as the coronavirus threatens the health and economic welfare of our nation, and we need government leadership to deal with the virus crisis

The Trump administration’s adversarial stance toward science has hindered its coronavirus response. By prioritizing political self-image over substance, the federal government has impeded progress and sowed confusion through misinformation. From failing to heed credible warnings to a premature haste to reopen economies, science has been minimized in the decision-making process. That tendency has compounded the pandemic and will likely continue to do so.

Dr. Anthony Fauci has been the public face of the government’s coronavirus response. He’s corrected some of the president’s more egregious misstatements (albeit diplomatically) and managed to stay in his role. The same dissent has driven an unprecedented number of staffers through 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue since January of 2017. Still it benefits no one for Trump and the Center For Disease Control’s foremost authority to deliver conflicting messages to a worried public. To undermine the individual entrusted with running point on the crisis is a foolish paradox. When Trump opines uninformed alongside Fauci, he does just that, given the public the choice between data driven science and his personal opinion.

Last week Trump turned Fauci into something of a political pawn. The CDC’s infectious disease team has had a policy of not testifying before Congress while combating the virus. Trump refused to allow Fauci to appear before the Democrat-led House because ‘’because the House is a bunch of Trump haters’’ but allowed him to appear before the GOP-held Senate, a body that has proven unwilling to hold him accountable for anything. The move was a naked attempt to keep the doctor from saying anything damaging before a House unfriendly to him. Politicizing Fauci’s involvement makes him seem less like a scientist and more as a partisan in the eyes of Trump’s supporters and allies. The end result is that science is marginalized in favor of what may be more palatable.

The Trump/Fauci relationship is emblematic of the administration’s problematic response to the pandemic. Ideally their relationship would be that of a respected scientist informing the decisions of the person elected to lead. But, Fauci’s guidance often clashes with Trump’s narrative. Ultimately his impact has been dulled by a cacophony of less-informed voices with other motivations. The result is a sloppy, patchwork reopening of the country based on whims rather than hard scientific data.

That ignorance was on full display last week. On Wednesday Trump actually said ‘’we have met the moment and prevailed’’. This is simply untrue. The US death toll has exceeded 90,000. There are more cases than there were in April or March, and reopening across the country promises to exacerbate an inevitable second wave of coronavirus. The statement is either a whopping lie intended to boost Trump’s public standing or indicative of how poor an understanding the president has of the pandemic. Neither can be ruled out. And neither would make the utterance any less irresponsible.

China and the World Health Organization have been reliable targets for Trump’s attempt to deflect blame from himself. The latter organization (whose US funding the president has cut off) has convened scientists the world over to speed up the development of a Covid-19 vaccine. The consensus of the medical community is that a vaccine is requisite for safely returning to normal. The United States will not be involved with the WHO initiative. Be it political posturing or lack of understanding, this decision is inexcusable. To cut funding and prevent input from US scientists on the most significant public health project in a century is to spit in the face of science for the sake of one ego.

Abundant testing for coronavirus is imperative. Grim as the global case numbers may be, they are incomplete. One needn’t have a Ph. .D. to know an accurate count of cases is necessary to adequately monitor and respond to the outbreak. Yet Trump said this week that testing may be ‘’overrated.’’ He acknowledged the US has more cases than any other country but seems to think it is because they’ve ran tests. ‘’If we didn’t do any testing, we would have very few cases.’’ Again, this astounding ignorance demonstrates that Trump fails to comprehend the purpose and significance of testing. While sticking his foot in his mouth, Trump announced the US had administered its 10 millionth test and that CVS would have 1,000 new testing sites up by the end of the month. He’d go on to say that the country has run more test than anyone else. This is highly misleading. The US lags behinds several countries in per capita testing; the number currently sits at 28,482 per million. That translates to .02% in a nation of 320 million. Even if the .02% figure were the best in the world, it would hardly be brag-worthy. Common sense dictates expansive, regular testing is key to beating back the virus. Yet to hear the president tell it, testing is something of a nuisance which may reflect poorly on him.

Donald Trump is a man of science the way Evil Kineval was a man of caution. Opinions not based in fact or peer-reviewed data are worse than useless in a pandemic. Due to Trump’s anti-intellectual proclivities, fact-less voices are given much more weight than they merit. Since March it is evident Trump is at least as concerned with his political survival as he is with managing this crisis. The sad irony is that had Trump been less concerned with poll numbers and more concerned with the spread of Covid-19, there would likely be fewer dead Americans and a higher Trump approval rating. Mitigating the damage of this pandemic should be the president’s singular focus at the moment. The prudent way to do that is by heeding the experts appointed to guide him. Unfortunately those experts often tell the president things he doesn’t want to hear. Similar dissenters haven’t gotten far in three years of a Trump White House.

Learn More:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-who-usa/us-says-will-not-take-part-in-who-global-drugs-vaccine-initiative-launch-idUSKCN2261WJ

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/14/trump-coronavirus-testing-high-case-numbers-259524