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

 

The Future is Green

Brief #76—Economics
By Rosalind Gottfried
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.

read more

USDA Lets Biotech Companies Regulate Themselves

Brief #85—Environment
By Jacob Morton
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

read more

Future Dismal for Young Workers

Brief #75—Economics
By Rosalind Gottfried
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. 

read more

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

Brief #2—Presidential Campaign News
By Iryna Shkurhan
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.

read more
Jobs01 e1489352304814
Income Inequality at Highest Since Records Kept

Income Inequality at Highest Since Records Kept

Policy
The longest running growth in the economy (123 months) has also witnessed the highest level of income inequality ever recorded in the US. In the midst of incredible prosperity, less American are enjoying a share than in any previous generation.  The Gini index measuring distribution of wealth, with 0 representing total equality and 1.0 indicating total inequality has spiked to .485 in 2018 from .397 in 1967.  The starkest disparities are seen in the wealthy regions of NY, Connecticut, California, and Washington DC. where wealth is concentrated.  The states showing the highest disparities are California, Connecticut, Florida, Louisiana and New York.  Nine states experienced spikes in inequality between 2017-18.  While families making less than $15,000 a year have decreased the portion of families making over $250,000 has increased by 15%.   The top of the economic ladder remains solidly white and male and shows a wide gap between the sexes.  Women in the top 95 percentile of earners make 68 cents to the male dollar.

In the decades following World War II, the distribution of wealth was much more equal and this was true across all income levels.  Since the 1980s, the distribution of income has become progressively disparate with the bottom 50% experiencing completely stagnant wages.  The median household income has gone to $63,000 but that represents, after controlling for inflation, an income equivalent to 20 years ago.  Most of the gains have gone to the top 1% and even more dramatically to the top quarter of the top one percent.  The middle class has constricted, both in size of the group and in the assets of the group.  When wealth, rather than income, is considered the gaps are even wider and particularly pronounced when separated by races, where African American wealth is roughly 10% of average white wealth.

Analysis
Much of the explanation for the increased disparities can be attributed to the stagnant federal minimum wage which has been at $7.25 for 10 years. Though some states have increased their minimum wage, most of those gains have been lost to inflation.  The tax structure has been favoring the rich progressively since the era of Eisenhower.  In the Eisenhower era the wealthy were taxed at about 75% and the rate was 50% in the Nixon era.  Obama increased the taxes on the wealthy from 36% to 39%.  Under Trump’s plan the highest income bracket will be taxed at 37%.  Add to this mix the increasingly lower portion of tax revenues contributed by corporations, which stands at 10% of all federal revenues.  The corporate tax on profit went from 49% in the 1950s, to 25.6% between 1987 and 2008, to 12.1% in 2011.  With this data, the budget deficits resulting in lack of services and infrastructure repair are comprehensible.

The differences in wealth, as opposed to income, are even more telling in that they signify the consequences of intergenerational transmission of wealth.  For example, an affluent family can help a young couple buy a house, resulting in home equity and better neighborhoods to raise children in.  This becomes cyclical, giving those children an educational and resource advantage over other youths.  Consequently, even if the income gap between racial groups is closing, the wealth gap has widened.  The cyclical nature of these advantages will be sustained if systemic effort is not made to address it.  Some school districts and colleges are making such attempts but they are not sufficient to repair the system.

Resistance resources:

Photo by NeONBRAND

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Proposes Six Anti-Poverty Bills for a “A Just Society” Program

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Proposes Six Anti-Poverty Bills for a “A Just Society” Program

Policy
Congresswoman, and Democratic presidential hopeful, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has proposed a wide-ranging antipoverty program to reduce the hardships facing the poor and near poor in the US.  At a time when inequality is the highest its been in five decades, and the nation at its richest, over 40 million people qualify as poor.  The 2019 Federal poverty level for an individual was $12,400 while a family of four is poor if they make less than $25,750.  This official government measure underestimates the poor as it utilizes a set level which is applied across the continent (excluding Alaska and Hawaii)awHH regardless of cost of living differentials or specific family situations.  If the “near poor” are added (those making up to 150% of the poverty level) the figure would be as great as one third of the country.

Ocasio-Cortez’s “The Just Society,” platform, echoing the Great Society vision of the Lyndon B. Johnson administration which established new welfare laws as well as Medicare and Medicaid, actually is made up of six separate bills.  One bill would change the way the government establishes the official poverty level to include differences in geographic location as well as the real cost of necessities such as healthcare, childcare, housing, and “new necessities” such as internet access.  Other bills would cap the amount rents could increase; provide a federally run single payer health insurance; allow persons with criminal convictions, and those lacking documentation, to fully access social welfare programs; pressure federal contractors to increase wages and benefits; mandate employers to pay for family leave, adhere to predictable scheduling, and establish a living minimum wage.

Analysis:  Ocasio-Cortez suggests that the proposed comprehensive set of bills is the only viable option for attaining economic justice.  Although Democrats have a history of supporting such legislation as Ocasio-Cortez proposes, some feel that in so doing she is jeopardizing the moderate Democrats elected in the most recent election.  This debate within the Democratic party threatens to splinter the power of the party and is one articulated concern for exercising constraint in progressive programing.  A program that appears to move “too far to the left” is feared as providing fuel to the Republicans and conservatives, especially those who incorrectly label these measures as socialism.  Actually, these values have been a part of US social history since the New Deal of FDR’s era.  Additionally, other nations believe that these issues are human rights and guarantee them and so Ocasio-Cortez’s proposal also includes supporting the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, a United Nations treaty (1966) which states that all persons have the right to work, and the right to just conditions of work, Social Security, an adequate standard of living, including food, clothing, housing and health care.

Resistance Sources:

References:

Photo by unsplash-logoJonathan Kho

Trump’s Impeachment has Kicked Off. Here’s What You Can Expect

Trump’s Impeachment has Kicked Off. Here’s What You Can Expect

It’s a long time coming for some and a partisan outrage to others, but the impeachment proceedings of President Donald J. Trump are upon us. Since his inauguration in 2017 his personal and professional conduct have raised the specter of impeachment. Be it mental fitness, obstruction of various investigations, or emoluments, Trump has invited his removal on a near daily basis since being sworn in. The impeachment calls from the left side of the aisle have reached a boiling over point over the President’s abuse of foreign aid for his political advantage  in the 2020 election and can no longer be kept at bay. What to Expect From Impeachment Proceedings

What to Expect from Impeachment Proceedings

The Founding Fathers also  were extremely wary of foreign interference in elections and its effect on the young nation The Constitution states that impeachment can be brought against public officials for ‘’treason, bribery, high crimes and other misdemeanors.’’. And one of Congress’ categories for bringing impeachment is misuse of public office for personal gain. This provision is likely most applicable to Trump’s latest transgressions.

The basis of this Impeachment is a whistleblower complaint which alleges Trump attempted to coerce Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky into investigating the current frontrunner for the Democratic Presidential Nomination, Joe Biden. To entice the foreign leader to do his bidding, Trump put a hold on $391 million in military aid needed for Ukraine to defend itself against Russian-backed separatists. Despite being approved by Congress, the money sat frozen as Trump attempted to extort a political favor from another world leader.

The Impeachment inquiry will be spearheaded by the Adam Schiff-led House Intelligence Committee. Schiff has publicly stated his desire to hear the whistleblower (reportedly a CIA officer detailed to the White House) testify behind closed doors, as well as any other administration officials who were aware of the president’s actions and attempt to cover them up.

Another investigative matter for the Committee is the storage of the original transcript of the call between Trump and Zelensky. According to White House officials referenced in the whistleblower complaint, the transcript was placed on a computer system managed directly by the National Security Council. This computer is reserved only for highly sensitive government information and the transcript’s placement in it was an abuse of the system. White House officials mentioned in the complaint stated it was ‘’not the first time’’ politically sensitive information was placed on the system against protocol.

With Congress scheduled for a recess, many House representatives will return to their home districts to inform voters about the process and garner public support for impeachment. Once all available evidence is gathered, the House will determine whether or not to hold an impeachment vote.

At this point it seems likely that the House will move to impeach given the substance of the allegations and the Democratic advantage (235-198-1) among Representatives. Only a simple majority is needed for an Impeachment resolution  to pass the House, at which point Democrats will select managers to present their case to the Senate. Trump is almost certainly to be brought to trial.

The Senate trial operates like a criminal one, and represents the most significant stumbling block towards removing the president from office. House managers will present their case and act like prosecutors. Trump will be afforded the opportunity to mount a defense and have his personal attorney present. The trial will be presided over by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts. In order to remove the President from office a two-thirds majority vote must be returned by the Senate. The political split in Congress’ upper house is 54 Republicans to 48 Democrats. Each Senator is required to swear an oath that they will act with honesty and due diligence. The determining factor of the trial will be whether House Democrats can make a convincing enough case to sway 18 Republican Senators to return a guilty verdict.

The proceedings still carry significant political risk. Trump still enjoys approval ratings in the low to mid-40’s depending on the poll. Regardless of which polls are assessed, his job approval rating exceeds the current amount of public support for impeachment. He has admitted to the worst of the alleged transgressions, but his GOP enablers have brushed off other misdeeds for the entirety of the President’s term. Ultimately the Democratic Party may be damned if they don’t and damned if they do. However the risk seems worthwhile considering the stakes. If Trump weren’t impeached, it would serve as at least a tacit endorsement of soliciting foreign aid in an election campaign while  using Congressionally-approved military aid as leverage. If impeachment efforts fail, it serves as a stronger endorsement of such behavior from Trump’s allies and emboldens further lawlessness from this and future administrations. A swing and a miss could also incite Trump’s base and strengthen his reelection bid, a sadly ironic consequence given the issue at the heart of the matter. The stakes are high, but the risk is worthwhile to state emphatically that this type of presidential conduct will not go unchallenged.

Learn More

Photo by unsplash-logoMarkus Spiske

Trump’s Middle East Fiasco: Enter Iran

Trump’s Middle East Fiasco: Enter Iran

Policy Summary

In the midst of the shocking announcement of the Trump Administration’s plans to send troops to Saudi Arabia, it is becoming apparent that the President’s erratic and miscalculated take on Middle East policy has led us to a place with few allies. In the days preceding the recent attacks on Saudi oil facilities, the United States made it clear who they believed were the culprits. The Trump administration blamed Iran. Political analysts worldwide have been aghast at the United State’s consistent accusations against Iran, and it’s constant defense of Saudi Arabia. It has contributed to what one political reporter called, “an almost comical display of indecision, confusion and bluster by the leader of the world’s most powerful country”.

While announcing the plan to ship troops to Saudi Arabia for defensive purposes, Trump also imposed additional sanctions on Iran. Iran has  denied allegations of responsibility via a formal notice sent to Washington. U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo directly accused Iran of being behind the attacks on Saudi Arabia, which knocked out half of Saudi Arabia’s oil production. Pompeo wrote on Twitter, “Tehran is behind nearly 100 attacks on Saudi Arabia while Rouhani [Iran’s president] and Zarif [Iran’s foreign minister] pretend to engage in diplomacy”. Iran’s foreign ministry spokesman, Abbas Mousavi, said Pompeo’s comments were “fruitless and blind accusations and remarks are incomprehensible and meaningless.” Iranian officials then went a step further in cautioning that US military assets in the region are within range of its missiles.

President Hassan Rouhani and President Trump did not meet at the annual United Nations General Assembly in New York, this week. However on Thursday, Mr. Rouhani did not dismiss the idea that a future meeting with an American president was entirely possible as long as it was set by the Iranians. President Rouhani spoke of the intensified sanctions the United States has reimposed on Iran, “If he removes these preconditions, then negotiations with the U.S. are a possibility.”

Analysis

Trump’s “maximum pressure” campaign against Tehran is not working. Furthermore, it would appear that Trump has no official strategy. He does what his gut tells him to do. This means that on his own Trump could start a missile attack between the two nations with his erratic behavior. Military analysts say missile strikes or a naval siege could result in disastrous retribution.

Aggression toward Iranian allies, such as Lebanon’s militant Hezbollah party, could result in unfavorable tensions with Israel. Last week, the Pentagon advised the Trump administration against undertaking further exacerbating actions with Iran. Iranians, stirred by the recent accusations, could easily overreact resulting in deadly casualties or even war.

Focusing on diplomatic relations, European governments have been outwardly supportive of the Iranian nuclear agreement, negotiated by President Obama and our allies.  Trump pulled the US out of this agreement last year. Now European nations cast blame on hostile US policy for the current tensions with Iran. Angela Merkel, Germany’s chancellor, said recently, “The deal to stop Iran acquiring military nuclear capabilities is a building block we need to get back to”. Pushing the cliche,“America first” rhetoric,  secretary of state, Mike Pompeo is attempting to establish an anti-Iran international coalition, claiming that relations with Iran is the “world’s problem”.  Ironically, Saudi leaders have asserted that they do not trust Trump if war were to break out. But the Saudis may not be a match for a provoked Iran.

However, there is possibly a silver lining to the ongoing international fiasco involving Iran. It is causing many Americans to wake up to the importance of reasonable, thought out relations with the Middle East. The looming, global consequences of having a trigger-happy POTUS are becoming more and more defined by the day. Iran’s reluctance to succumb to Trump’s frequent hurling accusations should serve as a warning to the current administration.

Secretray of State  Pompeo is now stating the US seeks a “peaceful resolution” and is emphasizing a non-military means to address the crisis. With any luck, the Trump administration will realize that the ongoing strife between Iran and Saudi Arabia is not worth American lives, and will decide to take President Rouhani  up on his offer to meet.

Engagement Resources:

  • The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) is a multilateral, international organisation that works to build better policies for better lives.
  • USAID leads international development and humanitarian efforts to save lives, reduce poverty, strengthen democratic governance and help people progress beyond assistance.
  • The Wilson Center’s Middle East Program serves as a crucial resource for the policymaking community and beyond, providing analyses and research that helps inform U.S. foreign policymaking, stimulates public debate, and expands knowledge about issues in the wider Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region.
  • The Economic Commission for Western Asia (ECWA) is a UN organization with a purpose to stimulate economic activity in Western Asia member countries, strengthen cooperation between them and promote development.

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

 

Photo by unsplash-logoRyan Miglinczy

Iran’s Diplomatic Offensive

Iran’s Diplomatic Offensive

Policy summary

In an interview with NPR, Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif stated that Iran would not succumb to economic pressure by the Trump Administration. At this week’s UN General Assembly Zarif mentioned how Iran would not allow any foreign country to threaten Iran’s domestic law. This comes after the September 14, 2019 attack on Saudi Arabia’s oil facilities.

At the Iranian Mission to the UN in New York, Javad Zarif spoke about how Iran has no intentions to meet or negotiate with President Trump or Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. He also declared that if the countries were to speak, it should be at the International Criminal Court due to US Sanctions sending Iran into a state of starvation.

Zarif also directed his speech to the European nations of Germany, Britain, and France demanding they own up to the legal responsibility they have under the 2015 accord on Iran’s nuclear program, from which the US has now withdrawn.. Zarif demanded that these countries  ignore or break with US economic sanctions on Iran. He also called upon non-American oil firms to continue business with Iran in solidarity against US harassment.

Zarif also made it clear that if Iran’s oil was to be boycotted than why  should they care about the security of the oil of other countries? Zarif stated; “We will not invest in the security of the Persian Gulf if it is not secure for us, If we cannot sell our oil, why should we invest in other people’s security?”

The mentioning of not investing in other oil facilities security sends out a message based on the aftermath of oil and gas facilities being bombed by missiles and drones in Saudi Arabia. Both Trump and Pompeo have blamed Iran for the attacks calling it “an act of war.” However, Iran denies any allegations of being involved in the September 14 attack but has mentioned it could have been Yemeni forces (Yemeni forces are Iran-allied). The attacks at Saudi Arabia oil facilities was a message from Tehran to the United States, Saudi Arabia, and the rest of the world saying Iran will not fall to respond to threats from President Trump or Mike Pompeo.

ANALYSIS

Iran has no desire to negotiate with the Trump Administration. It is seeking to convince European nations and other world powers to stand up to US “bullying.” By not wanting to speak to both Trump and Pompeo, Iran has made it clear the she believes it is the US who is starting an act of war with the unfair economic sanctions being imposed on them.

The Iranian delegation’s purpose for their speech at the UN General Assembly was to strike a diplomatic offensive with European Unions  and others in defiance of the United States. They aim to have countries stand up against the US and more specifically, the Trump Administration. Seeing that the Iranian government has no interest in speaking with the United States, Zarif has declared that President Hassan Rouhani will meet individually with French President Emmanuel Macron, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

President Trump’s behavior towards Iran might make other world powers stand on Iran’s side. With Trump deciding to abandon the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2018, Iran has concluded  that negotiating with the United States is a waste of time. Iran at this week’s United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) expressed the view that anyone can stand up the United States.
During his speech at the United Against Nuclear Iran Summit on 25 September, Mike Pompeo had said the United States is still open to speak to Iran and peacefully resolve issues. However, shortly after Pompeo’s speech the Trump Administration barred senior Iranian government officials and their family members from entering the United States. The Trump Administration talks about seeking a peaceful resolution while still imposing sanctions and negating visas to Iran. This type of erratic behavior from the United States contradicts Mike Pompeo’s talk of  a diplomatic resolution.

Why speak about making peace when it is clear the United States wants to mark her superiority through hostile actions. If President Trump continues to anger the Iranian government, there cannot be a peaceful resolution to America’s ongoing conflict with Iran. In order to seek peace you must stop all threats and diplomatically address the problems on the table. If not the People and all foreign powers will ask the question ; are continued hostile actions by the US proving Iran’s diplomatic offensive to be correct?

Photo by unsplash-logoMajid Korang beheshti

US Power Grid Under Siege – Will the Lights Stay On?

US Power Grid Under Siege – Will the Lights Stay On?

Policy Summary

On March 5, 2019 electricity grid operators in the Western United States experienced an unprecedented, coordinated attempt to disrupt their services. The attack, exploiting vulnerabilities in the internet facing firewalls – the devices meant to filter out unwanted or hostile traffic – caused short disruptions in the systems that monitor the health of the grids. The nerve centers that route power from where it is produced to where it is needed. This effectively “blinded” the operators for up to 10 minute stretches.

There were no consumer or business power disruptions during this incident but it marked the first occasion that this kind of cyber attack had been reported to the Federal Department of Energy.  Two weeks prior to this event then-U.S. Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats warned that Russian hackers were capable of interrupting electricity “for at least a few hours,” similar to cyberattacks on Ukrainian utilities in 2015 and 2016 that caused hours long outages for about a quarter-million people.

Analysis

While the Federal Government is not generally in the business of energy production and distribution, it does have ultimate responsibility for regulating those industries and providing guidance.  The industry is governed by an interlocking set of organizations headed by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) a not-for-profit international regulatory authority whose mission is to assure the effective and efficient reduction of risks to the reliability and security of the grid. Other agencies involved include the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Department of Energy.

In the Trump Administration’s eagerness to promote fossil fuel extraction and power generation, the security of our energy distribution infrastructure has been left to a patchwork of agencies and excluded some that might help in resisting or repelling these attacks such as Department of Homeland Security or Federal Bureau of Investigation. Given the likelihood of foreign actors, it is disturbing that DHS played no role in the investigation or mitigation.

The March 5, 2019 attack was simple.  It exploited a known vulnerability in the firewall system software to restart the devices over and over again. No data was stolen and no systems were tampered with but, if an element of the grid had malfunctioned during one of these episodes, the grid operator would not have known it.

NERC issued a “lessons learned” report in early September noticeably not identifying or speculating on the source of the attacks. It’s recommendations were prescriptive, similar measures that you would take on your home computer systems – keep them up-to-date with the latest security patches from the vendor, change passwords frequently and use complex (longer, mixing case, numbers, symbols) password combinations and limit access to the public internet.

The Trump Administration has embraced cyber warfare as another element in its arsenal.  It is unclear if cyber defense is equally high on the agenda.

Resistance Resources

  • The Federation of American Scientists (FAS) provides science-based analysis of and solutions to protect against catastrophic threats to national and international security. Here’s there word on threats to the power grid
  • Department of Energy CyberSecurity Policy explains the DOE’s role in protecting our nation’s energy infrastructure
  • NERC “Lessons Learned” document goes into detail about the March incident
  • The Council on Foreign Relations warned of the threat in a 2017 report

Photo by unsplash-logoPatrick Tomasso

Employees or Independent Contractors?

Employees or Independent Contractors?

Policy
In September the California Legislature passed a bill (AB5) changing the classification of  drivers for such companies as Lyft and Uber to employee status rather than independent contractors  https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB5.  Several other states are in line to follow suit and many fear that California’s legislation will eventually spread across the country and the gig economy.  CA has over a half a million ridesharing drivers in Lyft and Uber indicating the significance of employment in the gig economy.  The bill could result in regulations which could significantly modify the pay and conditions of employment of a contingent work force typical of today’s gig economy.

An August 2019 NLRB ruling, with a majority of Trump appointees and one lone democrat, dealt a blow to the legislation in CA, and other similar ones in the pipeline, by asserting that it is difficult to draw a distinction between employees and independent contractors and functionally making it legal to misclassify “employees” as “contractors.

Analysis
The California bill has been controversial with the companies, as well as some of the drivers, contesting the notion of reclassification.  Some drivers fear the loss of job flexibility in hours and working conditions; very few drivers work 40 hours weeks (<8%) and 45% work less than 10 hours (Herrera 2019).  Many of the drivers rely on ridesharing gigs for all, or most, of their employment.  Some drivers augment full time low paying jobs while others are unable to work full time, or regular schedules, for a variety of reasons. An additional fear concerns the likelihood that rising costs to the consumers could significantly impede the likelihood that students and lower wage customers could continue to utilize the service threatening the livelihood of the current drivers.

Lyft and Uber, along with Door Dash, intend to spend 90 million dollars on a CA counter bill which, if successful, would force the legislature to reach a compromise bill.  One such prospect is instituting a 21 dollar minimum wage.

Resistance Sources:  Rideshare Drivers United https://drivers-united.org/, is a union representing 5000 drivers in Southern California active in countering the opposition to AB5.  This group utilizes software to organize workers who have no local gathering place.

His website https://www.gigeconomydata.org/ provides data on gig workers and can clarify issues facing such workers.

References: 

Photo by unsplash-logoDan Gold

Trump Dangles Military Aid in Exchange for Personal Favors

Trump Dangles Military Aid in Exchange for Personal Favors

The latest alleged malfeasance by President Trump involves an inappropriate conversation with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky. On August 12th a whistleblower filed a complaint with Michael Atkinson, Intelligence Community Inspector General, concerning a troubling interaction between the two presidents. The Wall Street Journal subsequently reported that Trump repeatedly pressured Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, over their involvement with a Ukrainian gas company. He did so while withholding $250 million in previously approved military aid. Now an impeachment inquiry is in the works.

The money began flowing to Ukraine in 2015, in response to Russia’s annexation of the Crimean Peninsula. Its purpose was to assist a struggling ally and push back against further Kremlin aggression. Trump put a hold on the money earlier in the fiscal year to ensure America’s interest were being looked after in relation to foreign aid. He asked the Department of Defense to look into the package, which included $50 million in weaponry. It is worth noting that the Trump administration was the first one to explicitly sign off on ‘’lethal weapons’’ for Ukraine. The DoD approved the aid, viewing the money as a wise investment, yet the money sat idle in the government’s coffers. Congressional Democrats grew frustrated by the delay and were set to vote on an amendment to prevent future stall tactics in defense spending when the money was released on September 12th. The President offered no explanation for his sudden change of heart.

Whistle blower complaints in the executive branch are designed to protect classified information, while providing a system of checks against presidential misconduct. In this case an anonymous source went to Atkinson reporting on the conversation between Trump and Zelensky and more that we still don’t know about. The focus of the complaint was a ‘’promise’’ made by Trump to said unnamed leader, presumably Zelensky. Atkinson began a preliminary investigation and found the complaint credible and urgent.  In terms of US law a “credible and urgent complaint” is defined as ‘’a serious or flagrant problem, abuse or violation of the executive branch or deficiency.’’ In accordance with statute Atkinson turned a copy of the complaint over to acting DNI head, Joseph Maguire, who then had seven days to provide Congress with a copy. Maguire failed to do so, allegedly at the direction of the White House. The Trump Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel provided Maguire with specious legal cover, which has been rendered moot in light of the President’s new decision to release a transcript of the call in question.

Trump, true to form, has denied any wrongdoing, but not that he didn’t  discuss the Bidens with Zelensky. His explanation for withholding the military aid changed literally overnight. On Monday, the 23rd he was worried about the money going to a corrupt country like the Ukraine. On Tuesday, the 24th, it was because European nations are not paying their fair share. The first explanation is laughable coming from him, and the second is factually incorrect.

The man who spent more than two years denying he solicited foreign help to win the 2016 election, seems to have done just that to boost his 2020 reelection bid. A key difference between the two scenarios is that the bar for impeachment is lower than conviction in criminal court. Trump has survived a myriad of scandals leading up to and during his presidency. However if the impeachment investigation substantiates the charges against him and/or reveal additional criminal conduct, the Democrats could flip enough Senate Republicans to remove him from office. If proven true, even his staunchest allies may have difficulty defending a President who attempted to extort an ally for his own benefit.

Learn More:

Photo by unsplash-logoRae Tian

Judge Blocks Voter Registration Drive Restrictions In Tennessee

Judge Blocks Voter Registration Drive Restrictions In Tennessee

Policy Summary: On February 6, 2019 HB 1079 was introduced in the Tennessee House of Representatives. The bill put forth additional requirements for voter registration drives that are performed in the state. Voter registration drives must register with the state, add disclaimers on their voting ad materials and turn in all applications within ten (10) days of collection. Additionally, civil and criminal penalties were added which were tied to the number of incomplete forms a registration drive submitted. The fines could go as high as $10,000 as well as subjecting certain persons to time in prison. The bill was voted on and passed by both the Tennessee House of Representatives and Senate and Governor Bill Lee signed the law on May 2, 2019. The bill was slated to go into effect in October but a lawsuit was brought by the League of Women Voters to block the law from going into effect. On September 12, 2019, Judge Aleta Trauger of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee granted a Motion for a Preliminary Injunction that blocked the rules from being enforced pending resolution of the case in court. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE 

Analysis: The bill in Tennessee is another example of the ways states go about trying to suppress votes. Registration drives have long been used as a way to reach out to people and encourage eligible people to register to vote. Some people might find it difficult to travel great distances to register at a government office or might simply be too intimidated to deal with the nuances and complexities of registering and dealing with a state official.

What happened in Tennessee was that a group called the Tennessee Black Voter Project organized a voter registration drive prior to the 2018 midterm elections and got 90,000 people to fill out voter registration applications. With so many applications coming in so close to Election Day election officials said they were overwhelmed with the number of applications and wanted to ensure that they would not be swamped with so many registrations again.

However, the reasoning of the election officials advocating for the new rules appears to have been at odds with the problems they said they encountered with the high number of applications. Having a voter registration drive submit all registration application materials within ten (10) days would not have helped to solve the problem of having to process a high number of applications. Nor would have disclaimers on a group’s voter registration drive ad materials or registration with the state elections office done anything significant to ease the problems the elections office said they encountered. These regulations appear nothing more than additional regulations added to intimidate voter registration drives especially since this law was passed immediately after the successful activities of the Tennessee Black Voter Project.

What is additionally troubling about the law was the civil and criminal penalties that the law imposed. Subjecting volunteers to a potential prison sentence merely for errors in the registration applications are nothing more than an intimidation tactic to pressure groups into not engaging in voter registration drive activities. And the same can be said for the potential monetary fines. Fines that could go as high as $10,000 would make people think twice before volunteering for a voter registration drive. Judge Trauger called the law likely unconstitutional especially since the law was making it burdensome for voters to exercise their right to participate in the political process. This was a voter suppression tactic and the court made the right call in granting the Preliminary Injunction and exposing the law for what it really was – an unconstitutional attempt to bar people from the polls. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE

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.

Supreme Court Upholds Trumps Ban on Immigrants from Central America Seeking Asylum in the US

Supreme Court Upholds Trumps Ban on Immigrants from Central America Seeking Asylum in the US

Policy
The Supreme Court has recently upheld the Trump Administration’s decision to bar migrants from certain Central American countries (predominantly The Northern Triangle – El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras) from seeking refuge in the United States. Trump has been granted his wish of blocking migrants from making asylum claims in the US; and instead requiring them to first apply for asylum in a country they pass while en route to the US. Most often, this third country is Mexico and refers to a previous proposal made by the Trump Administration in the Summer of 2019. Mexicans themselves are unaffected by this new policy because they share a border with the US and therefore cannot be outright banned in such a way. Mexico has previously written off the US attempts to make Mexico a ‘safe third country’ as overall numbers in border crossings have declined.

Supreme Court Justices, Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg submitted written oppositions to this decision. Sotomayor expressed that this new policy, “topples decades of settled asylum practices and affects some of the most vulnerable people in the Western Hemisphere – without affording the public a chance to weigh in.”  Various organizations – such as the ACLU – have also publicized their disdain and pleaded that such a decision violates principles of international law.

Analysis
More than 400,000 people from The Northern Triangle are caught illegally crossing the border with Mexico annually. More than 400,000 people would theoretically be turned away from claiming asylum for the immediate foreseeable future in the US. As the ACLU claimed, there are long-existing asylum laws that have been a pivotal part of international law that Trump’s new rule violates. To much of Trump’s xenophobic fan base, this comes as a victory on the path to essentially closing the border

As Justice Sotomayor pointed out, the public has not had much of an opportunity to weigh in on the matter. Given that immigration has been as a household topic during this Administration, a public debate might prove divisive. But given that the US is a democracy it is a conversation worth having.

Engagement Resources

  • 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.
  • 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.
  • us: an organization that aims to promote the tech community to support policies that keep the American Dream alive. They specifically and currently focus on immigration reform.

Photo by unsplash-logoAditya Joshi

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