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.
Jobs01 e1489352304814
Federal District Court Issues Ruling Prohibiting Citizenship Status Question on 2020 National Census Questionnaire

Federal District Court Issues Ruling Prohibiting Citizenship Status Question on 2020 National Census Questionnaire

Brief #75—Civil Rights


Policy Summary

Article 1, Section 2 of the United States Constitution states “Representatives…shall be apportioned among the several States…according to their respective numbers. The actual Enumeration shall be made…within every subsequent term of ten years.” This constitutional command is the basis for the United States to hold a census to determine the population of all persons residing within the borders of the United States. The last decennial census was held in 2010 and the next one is scheduled for 2020.

In 2017, Wilbur Ross was confirmed as the Secretary of Commerce. The Secretary oversees the Department of Commerce which includes the United States Census Bureau, the agency that oversees every decennial census. In March 2018, Secretary Ross issued a memorandum instructing the Census Bureau to reintroduce a question about United States citizenship status on the 2020 questionnaire. The citizenship question had not appeared on the questionnaire since 1950. In the days after Secretary Ross’s memorandum, multiple lawsuits were filed to challenge the placement of the citizenship status question on the upcoming questionnaire of the 2020 census as well as other procedural issues related to a possible trial on the issue. In the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, multiple cases against the Department of Commerce were consolidated and the case went before Judge Jesse Furman. In a ruling handed down on January 15, 2019, Judge Furman prohibited Secretary Ross’s order to add the citizenship question to the 2020 census questionnaire. LEARN MORE

Analysis
Judge Furman’s lengthy 277 page ruling explaining his decision to prohibit the citizenship question from being added to the 2020 census questionnaire is not just a rebuke to the Trump Administration’s anti – immigrant rhetoric but to the methods of Secretary Ross and the general chaotic nature of the Trump Administration. Judge Furman thoroughly criticizes Secretary Ross’s methods in trying to push through the addition of the citizenship question. Judge Furman writes that the Secretary “failed to consider several important aspects of the problem; alternately ignored, cherry-picked, or badly misconstrued the evidence in the record before him; acted irrationally both in light of that evidence and his own stated decisional criteria; and failed to justify significant departures from past policies and practices.” What the judge was pointing out was that Secretary Ross had no respect for the laws, rules and procedures already in place and seemed intent instead on pushing through an outcome that he had already predetermined himself – that a question inquiring into a person’s citizenship should be added to the 2020 census questionnaire. Taken in the context of President Trump’s anti – immigrant rhetoric and the Administration’s tendency to blame immigrants for being habitual lawbreakers when they enter the United States, the ruling from Judge Furman highlighted the uncomfortable fact that lawbreakers are not just immigrants but can easily be found in members of President Trump’s own administration.

The ruling does not explicitly rule that the citizenship inquiry on the questionnaire is unconstitutional but it has helped to encourage more debate on whether the United States should ask such a sensitive question especially in light of a President who is currently trying to take a hard – line on immigration issues. The question is seen as a way to suppress new immigrants from participating in the democratic process because immigrants have reason to fear government agents asking too many questions about their legal status. Some persons may simply choose not to fill out any question on the questionnaire at all and might simply just ignore it. This can have a negative effect on the communities where a person lives because an inaccurate count of people living in certain areas can lead to a misallocation of federal funds and resources (safety and health) and lead to errors when drawing state and federal congressional districts. Having the citizenship question on the 2020 census questionnaire will instead likely deter some people from filling out the form out of fear. A better approach would be to leave the citizenship question off the questionnaire, as this had been the norm in the U.S. since 1950, the last time the citizenship question was even on the national census. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE

Engagement Resources:

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) – blog post commenting on court ruling prohibiting census citizenship question.

National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) Education Fund – non – profit group website monitoring census issues as they affect Latino communities.

Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) – minority non – profit group’s statement on court ruling prohibiting census citizenship question.

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

Photo by unsplash-logo
Andres Urena

Trump and Destruction of the American Mind

Trump and Destruction of the American Mind

Donald Trump completes two years as president, and one characteristic of his term has been disdain for scientific evidence, historical perspectives, educated opinions and traditional alliances. These attitudes are not Trump’s own and the presidency represents longstanding mistrust of elites, experts and foreign ties. “To wit, in Trump’s deeply fractionated American republic, we the people now inhabit a rapidly descending ‘hollow’ land of unending submission, crude consumption, dreary profanity and immutably shallow pleasures,” argues Louis René Beres, emeritus professor of international law at Purdue University. “Bored by the suffocating banality of daily life and beaten down by the grinding struggle to stay hopeful amid ever-widening polarities of wealth and poverty, Americans grasp anxiously for almost any available lifeline of promising distraction.” Beres questions the purpose of a society that prioritizes its comfort over the very real survival of refugees fleeing war in Syria or poverty in Central America. Americans are exhausted and manipulated, and even great wealth cannot protect them from alienation, meaningless existence and perhaps catastrophe. The US could rise again as global leader, Beres concludes, but only if the nation takes stock of how far it has fallen. – YaleGlobal

Trump and Destruction of the American Mind

The first two years of the Trump presidency have been characterized by disdain for intellect, history, science and expertiseLouis René BeresTuesday, January 22, 2019

AmerMindBeresBannerJan2019%20copy
A virtuous nation? Central American asylum seekers await apprehension and possible separation at US border; Donald Trump meets with buddy Vladimir Putin in Helsinki

WEST LAFAYETTE, INDIANA: An open loathing of intellect has become substantially de rigeur for Donald Trump and his supporters. Accordingly, the nation’s chief executive regards terms like “intellectual” or “analytic” as epithets rather than positive attributes or prospectively gainful expectations.

While Trump did not create this demeaning subordination of the “mind,” it is nonetheless an integral component of his bitter and corrosive presidency. Furthermore, there are particular concerns. Above all, one must now inquire, how can an American president so willfully ignore the obvious foreign and domestic policy manipulations committed by his Russian counterpart and the deepening concerns shared by intelligence officials, investigators, congressional representatives of both parties, allies and other world leaders? Indeed, even in the absence of any recognizable “high thinking” in the White House, alarm builds that one superpower president has become the pawn of another power.

Trump’s curious ascent to the American presidency did not arise in a vacuum. Rather, the country’s long history of distrust for intellect and science conveniently set the stage for such debilitating and portentous national leadership. In the words of poet W.B. Yeats, “There is no longer a virtuous nation, and the best of us live by candlelight.”

We dare not speak of “tragedy.”  Tragedy, unlike catastrophe and misfortune, is ennobling. It demands a victim, either individual or societal, who suffers markedly and undeservedly. It follows that a democratic and presumably virtuous nation that elected a blustering businessman and reality TV star can hardly be held blameless.

Today, not only the crass American “emperor,” but also those still watching the stifling “parade” with unsuitable deference are similarly “naked.” To wit, in Trump’s deeply fractionated American republic, we the people now inhabit a rapidly descending “hollow” land of unending submission, crude consumption, dreary profanity and immutably shallow pleasures. Bored by the suffocating banality of daily life and beaten down by the grinding struggle to stay hopeful amid ever-widening polarities of wealth and poverty, Americans grasp anxiously for almost any available lifeline of promising distraction. Small wonder that the cavernous opiate crisis is deep enough to drown whole oceans of a once-sacred poetry.

In part, at least, because of the grievously misdirected and ineffectual stewardship of the current president, both the nation and the much wider system of nation-states are increasingly imperiled. Where, then, shall people seek to dispel any still-lingering public apprehensions concerning collective survival and human improvement? Where, indeed, can they discover any usefully reinforcing visions of social cooperation and personal growth?

Misled by the self-destructive syntax of “America First,” Americans have already forgotten that world politics is inevitably a system with US prosperity inextricably linked to the calculable well-being of other societies.

In Trump’s cliché-ridden America, we the people are no longer shaped by common feelings of reverence or compassion, or even the tiniest hints of some clarifying analytic thought. Unsurprisingly, education failures represent a large part of the anti-intellectual problem. Even in the nation’s best colleges and universities, there is now far greater interest in studying “practical” matters than in learning history, government, literature, music or philosophy. And why not? In this country, true learning assuredly doesn’t “pay.”

In this feverishly disjointed era, the US president fervently encourages Americans to resist aggressively intellect, science, journalism and history. Often, too, even the most affluent US citizens separate themselves to inhabit the loneliest of places. Apart from their ownership of more conspicuously glittering “stuff,” there is little about greater wealth than can insulate these citizens from anomie, alienation and an utterly profound sense of meaninglessness.

I belong, therefore I am” – this is not what philosopher René Descartes had in mind when he famously urged intellectual thought and purposeful doubt. It is also a sad credo, an unhesitatingly pathetic cry that social acceptance and certain related affections are roughly equivalent to physical survival and that even the sorely pretended pleasures of inclusion are desperately worth pursuing. At the same time, Americans shrug off the very real survival issue of others fleeing war in Syria or hopeless poverty in Central America. Although international law obliges the United States to oppose crimes of genocide and crimes against humanity, Trump remains silent on irremediable war crimes committed by Syria’s murderous dictator and his Russian presidential patron – this despite the fact that international law represents an incorporated part of the law of the United States. In the words of Justice Horace Gray delivering the 1900 US Supreme Court judgment in Paquete Habana, “International law is part of our law, and must be ascertained and administered by the courts of justice of appropriate jurisdiction….”

For most of our young people, learning has become a reluctantly required and inconvenient commodity, nothing more. At the same time, commodities exist for one overriding purpose. They are there, much like the newly minted college graduates themselves, to be marketed, bought and sold.

Though faced with distinctly genuine threats of war, illness, impoverishment and terror, vast millions of Americans still choose to distract and amuse themselves with assorted forms of morbid excitement, public scandal and the thoroughly inane repetitions of an authentically illiterate political discourse. Not a day goes by that we don’t notice some premonitory sign of impending catastrophe. Still, this self-anesthetized nation continues to impose upon its exhausted and manipulated people a shamelessly open devaluation of disciplined thought.  

Soon, even if the United States should somehow manage to avoid nuclear war and nuclear terrorism under the relentless corrupting Trump leadership, the swaying of the American ship will become so violent that even the hardiest lamps will be overturned. Then, the phantoms of great ships of state, once laden with silver and gold, may no longer lie forgotten. Instead, citizens will finally understand that the circumstances that once sent the great compositions of Homer, Maimonides, Goethe, Milton, Shakespeare, Freud and Kafka to join the disintegrating works of forgotten poets were neither unique nor transient.

In an 1897 essay titled “On Being Human,” Woodrow Wilson, later president of Princeton and the United States, inquired coyly about the authenticity of America. “Is it even open to us to choose to be genuine?” This president answered “yes,” but only if we first refused to stoop to join the inglorious “herds” of mass society. Wilson describes the challenges: “once it was a simple enough matter to be a human being, but now it is deeply difficult; because life was once simple, but is now complex, confused, multifarious. Haste, anxiety, preoccupation, the need to specialize and make machines of ourselves, have transformed the once simple world, and we are apprised that it will not be without effort that we shall keep the broad human traits which have so far made the earth habitable.”

In all societies, the meticulous care of individual souls is critically important. In principle, there can be a better American soul, but not until we first affirm a prior obligation to shun the unsustainable and inter-penetrating seductions of mass culture, rank imitation, shallow thinking, organized mediocrity and as corollary a manifestly predatory presidential politics of “rallies.”

“This is the dead land…,” intones T.S. Eliot in The Hollow Men. Here, as the prophetic poet already understood, those still living must reluctantly plan to receive “the supplication of a dead man’s hand.” For the steadily weakening United States, now in cascading moral and physical decline, there does exist a more promising and dignified orientation, but it would require more conscious acceptance of how far the nation has fallen during the first years of Trump’s convulsive presidency.

This two-year anniversary is not one for anyone to celebrate with pride – except perhaps for Vladimir Putin and Bashar al Assad.

Louis René Beres was educated at Princeton (PhD, 1971) and is the author of many books and articles dealing with international relations and international law. Emeritus Professor of International Law at Purdue, Dr. Beres was born in Zürich, Switzerland. His twelfth and latest book is Surviving Amid Chaos: Israel’s Nuclear Strategy (Rowman & Littlefield, 2016; second edition, 2018). Some of his essays on America and mass society can be found at Oxford University Press, The Daily Princetonian, The Hudson Review; The Montreal Review; Jurist; US News & World Report, The Atlantic, The Hill; The National Interest; The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and YaleGlobal Online.

This article was posted January 18, 2019 by YaleGlobal. Additional credit: MacMillan Center.

Democrats’ Green New Deal Gains Momentum amid Shutdown

Democrats’ Green New Deal Gains Momentum amid Shutdown

Brief #54—Environment

Policy Summary
New York governor Andrew Cuomo announced Thursday that his new executive budget would focus on diminishing the state’s dependence on fossil fuels and promoting a clean energy economy. The governor is the latest in a long line of democratic politicians who are finding the intersection of economy and energy to be a unifying platform for the party and is the first state lawmaker to openly brand a budget as being part of the Green New Deal.

The Green New Deal is a proposed economic stimulus program designed to address both economic inequalities and climate change at once. Numerous representatives in the house and senate are championing the program which promotes building reduced-carbon infrastructure, financial incentives for green investment, and curbs on corporate tax evasion. Among the program’s more prominent proponents are Cory Booker, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ayanna Pressley, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren.

Both old and new guard democrats were given a further platform to highlight their unity on the issue this Wednesday as they questioned the president’s nominee for Administrator of the Environmental Protections Agency, Andrew Wheeler. Wheeler, a staunch crusader for environmental deregulation, is a convenient target in the fight for environmental protectionism and though his nomination is likely to clear the republican senate, the publicity that democrats reap from the hearing amid the US government shutdown is likely to increase voter support for their cause.

Policy Analysis

Democrats have chosen environmental health and preservation as an issue to unite the party on. Staving off the negative effects of climate change and ensuring air quality are among the top priorities of the official party platform. Governor Cuomo’s new state budget, while by no means perfect, is an integral launching point for Democratic efforts to shore up holes in the defense of environmental policy. To date, the Trump administration has rolled back 47 environmental regulations created from the Nixon through the Obama eras, and has proposed legislation to roll back another 31 regulations.Importantly for democrats, the focus on strengthening environmental regulations is a mission that can be pursued even in the midst of the country’s longest government shutdown.

Engagement Resources:

  • The Climate Mobilization: Volunteer organization seeking to curb the effects of climate change
  • Data for Progress: Research organization dedicated to highlighting voter attitudes
  • Global Greens: International volunteer organization dedicated to participatory governance and sustainability
  • Sunrise Movement: Grassroots organization aimed at employing youth in green sectors
  • UN Environment: United Nations program designed to map pathways toward sustainable development

This brief was submitted by U.S. RESIST environmental analyst Andrew Thornebrooke. Contact: andrew@thornebrooke.com

The Many Global Agreement Withdrawals of the Trump Administration

The Many Global Agreement Withdrawals of the Trump Administration

Brief #55—Foreign Policy

President Trump’s campaign was defined by the complete rejection of international cooperation and multilateral agreements. According to Trump’s mindset, in every deal the United States was either being cheated or doing the cheating, and his predecessors had been doing too much of the former. This turned out to be a popular message, with many of his supporters believing that these agreements were crafted without the interests of common Americans in mind. Trump once would have had to secure the permission of Congress before withdrawing from these agreements, but precedence has changed over the years, allowing the President to single handedly remove the country from agreements which took years of political maneuvering and Congressional approval to sign in the first place. Below we consider the effects of some of Trump’s most notorious withdrawals.

The Iran Deal

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, commonly referred to as the Iran Deal, was a historic product of the Obama administration’s attempts to build a stable network of international cooperation. The deal placed restrictions on the amount of nuclear energy produced by Iran, in the interest of avoiding the possibility of enriched Uranium being used for nuclear weapons, in return for an end to the crippling sanctions levied against them by the United States, EU, and UN. Despite assurances by the International Atomic Energy Agency, who were granted permission under the deal to inspect nuclear facilities, that Iran remain in accordance, President Trump ended US support of the deal in May of 2018.

In response, UK Prime Minister Theresa May and French President Emmanuel Macron declared their continued support for the deal, and the EU threatened to sanction firms who abided by new US sanctions. Nevertheless, the Iranian economy now operates under the weight of both the JCPOA’s energy restrictions as well as US sanctions. The Iranian Rial dropped by 14% in the three days following the announcement of the withdrawal of the United States. The destabilizing of the agreement also encouraged Israel to take the opportunity to strengthen its position against Syria, an ally of Iran. Immediately following Trump’s announcement of withdrawal, the IDF launched artillery strikes at the Syrian city of Baath, which lies in the demilitarized zone just outside of the Golan Heights, a region of Syria which has been under Israeli occupation since 1967. Iran responded, launching missiles towards Israeli bases in the Golan Heights, to which Israel responded with Operation House of Cards, which involved strikes against over 50 Iranian targets across Syria. Iran may continue to comply with energy restrictions for now, assuming the continued support of EU nations, but with continued military tension against neighboring states, and anti-American sentiment rising in response to sanctions, they may give up the hope of international cooperation, never mind enter into to a future deal.

The Paris Climate Accord

On June 1st, 2017, President Trump announced that the United States was withdrawing from the Paris Climate Accords, a historic 2015 international agreement to reduce emissions in an attempt to avoid the worst effects of climate change. In response to the withdrawal, Syria and Nicaragua signed onto the agreement, making the United States the only non-participatory country in the world. Technically, the US is still included in the agreement, and must remain so until after the 2020 elections, as per the initial rules of the agreement. For now, State Department officials continue to show up at all periodic meetings concerning the future of the agreement, but no longer take a leadership role in the proceedings. Trump has continued to cut environmental protections, rolling back the Obama-era Clean Power Plan and canceling a planned $2 billion payment to the Green Climate Fund, which would have helped developing countries transition to renewable energy production. However, the environmental movement in the United States has been invigorated in the face of these cutbacks, with freshman Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the Sunrise Movement pushing climate change action to the front of the Democratic party’s platform and calling for a Green New Deal to build a new non-extractive economy.

Trans-Pacific Partnership 

Signed in 2016, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was a sweeping trade agreement which would have strengthened economic ties between the United States and twelve Pacific nations, primarily through reduced tariffs. The agreement was signed but never ratified, with Trump withdrawing in the first week of his presidency, a month before it would have gone into effect. During his campaign Trump frequently denounced the TPP, along with the modern consensus of low barriers on the international flow of capital from which it came. This globalist tradition was seen to have helped cause the domestic evaporation of manufacturing jobs from which Trump drew so much support.

The remaining nations ended up proceeding without the US, signing the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. The EU has also been forming trade agreements with many of the TPP signatories, and China has been moving forward with their own version of the TPP, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership. Trump suggested last August that the US might rejoin the deal after receiving pushback from Republican lawmakers concerned over the profits of exporting companies in their states. Japan and Vietnam are both major food importers who would have been included in the TPP. Lawmakers were also concerned that the US had given away a strong tool for competing with China in the Pacific region. Returning now would mean that the United States would have given away much of the leverage it built in the original preparation for the deal.

UN Councils

The UN has always been a specific target of Trump’s ire, partially due to the significant funding we have provided for its support. This has so far manifested in our withdrawal from two important UN councils. One is The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), which promotes international respect and awareness for the importance of human rights, education, and peace. UNESCO originally lost US funding in 2011 when its members voted to recognize Palestine as an independent participant in the agency. Trump pulled the US out of UNESCO in October of 2017 after it designated a Palestinian region of the West Bank as an endangered World Heritage Site. Now the US cannot contribute to the management of the 1,073 World Heritage Sites around the world, and surrenders any possibility of resuming funding for the many programs UNESCO operates to reduce illiteracy and oppression.

The United States is now also the only country other than Iran, North Korea, and Eritrea to refuse to participate in the United Nations Human Rights Council. Former Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley justified the withdrawal last July by denouncing the council’s five resolutions passed against Israel that year, particularly one which condemned US and Israeli businesses investing in illegal Israeli settlements in the West bank. By removing itself from the Human Rights Council, our government reduces both international oversight over its actions as well as international legitimacy in its criticism of others.

Resistance Resources 

  • Human Rights Watch – An organization dedicated to fighting oppression from a global perspective
  • Roots Action – An online activist group devoted to pushing US domestic and foreign policy in a progressive direction

This Brief was submitted by U.S. RESIST NEWS Foreign Policy Analyst Colin Shanley: Contact Colin@usresistnews.org

Photo by Kyle Glenn

Court of Appeals Issues Ruling Prohibiting Elected Officials From Banning Online Critics on Social Media Platforms

Court of Appeals Issues Ruling Prohibiting Elected Officials From Banning Online Critics on Social Media Platforms

Brief #74—Civil Rights

Policy Summary
Phyllis Randall is an elected official and holds the position of Chair for Loudon County, Virginia, Board of Supervisors. In this role, Ms. Randall opened a Facebook page titled “Chair Phyllis J. Randall’s” Facebook page which contained content that related to her official duties as Chair for the Board of Supervisors. (Ms. Randall also has a separate personal Facebook page for personal and private use). Ms. Randall classified her “Chair Facebook” page as a “government official” page.

On February 3, 2016, Brian Davison, a private citizen, attended a Loudon town hall meeting that also included Ms. Randall and the Loudon County School Board. Later on that evening, Ms. Randall posted information from the meeting which Mr. Davison then responded to with comments he posted on Ms. Randall’s “Chair Facebook” page. Ms. Randall saw that the comments were about accusations of conflict of interests by members of the board. Ms. Randall decided to delete her Facebook meeting post and Mr. Davison’s comments on her post. She then decided to ban Mr. Davison from the “Chair Facebook” page.

Mr. Davison brought a lawsuit against Ms. Randall in the federal district court for the Eastern District of Virginia which ruled Ms. Randall violated Mr. Davison’s Free Speech rights under the First Amendment. Ms. Randall appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals which ended up affirming the trial court’s ruling against Ms. Randall. LEARN MORE

Analysis
This case is the first case decided at the Court of Appeals level that has addressed the issue of how elected officials can treat public criticism of their official duties on social media platforms and the First Amendment concerns connected to that. The case will likely be influential in the coming years because of the number of politicians who use social media to interact with their constituents and conduct government policy, most notably President Donald Trump on his Twitter account. The key takeaway from this opinion is how the court determined that social media platforms as used by elected public officials “bear the hallmarks of a public forum.” Under this category, the government (or an elected official) cannot restrict speech on their official government social media accounts based on their content without a compelling state interest. What Ms. Randall attempted to do in her case was censor speech that could have been of interest to the public because of their embarrassing implications to herself and the rest of the Board. Quite simply, this was viewpoint discrimination and has been prohibited by the First Amendment long before social media platforms were developed. Katie Fallow, a senior staff attorney at the Knight Institute, said it best when she said “Public officials…have no greater license to suppress dissent online than they do offline.” The rules regarding Free Speech and the First Amendment and social media platforms are still being developed but this case sends a strong signal that the First Amendment will likely have a strong role to play in the development of free speech rules on social media in the years and decades to come. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE

Engagement Resources:

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

Photo by unsplash-logoROBIN WORRALL

Trump’s Emissions Rollbacks Refuted by New Study

Trump’s Emissions Rollbacks Refuted by New Study

Brief #53—Environment

Policy Summary
A 16-author study published in the December issue of Science reassessed the 2009 Endangerment Finding for greenhouse gas emissions. The report found increased evidence that greenhouse gas emissions endanger public health and welfare and is being considered as a possible way to refute emissions regulation rollbacks by the Trump administration.

The Science report further strengthened the 2009 Endangerment Finding by incorporating new climate data from across the ten years since the original study was carried out and concluded that rising greenhouse gases detrimentally endanger public health and lead to “violent interactions between individuals” due to resource scarcity. The original Endangerment Finding defined a number of greenhouse gases including carbon dioxide, hydrofluorocarbons, methane, nitrous oxide, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride as contributing harm to the public health and environment, and therefore subject to the Clean Air Act. The new study further strengthens the findings of the original, and further cements the EPA’s rejection of petitions to reconsider the findings.

To date, the Trump administration has implemented or proposed 78 separate rollbacks of various climate regulations. The majority of those rollbacks have focused on easing regulations concerning pollution and emissions, and include reversals of previous regulations that required oil and gas companies to report on methane emissions, and rescinded the Obama-era “Social Cost of Carbon” metric.

Policy Analysis
The report’s finding that evidence for the harmful effects of greenhouse gas emissions is more conclusive than ever is an important one and may help to shore up some of the many battles of the administration’s war on the environment. When combined with a recent analysis by researchers at Harvard University that found that the Trump climate rollbacks could lead to an extra 80,000 deaths per decade, the study is likely to prove a valuable tool for legal challenges to the administration’s dismantling of existing regulations.

The report also comes at a time when courtroom jockeying has become the standard for mitigating the administration’s attempts to completely deregulate big businesses’ interactions with the environment. A fact the newly Democratic congress is not likely to overlook.

 Engagement Resources:

  • Alliance for Climate Education: A video education program that seeks to empower youth to create positive environmental change in their everyday lives.
  • Citizens’ Climate Lobby: A nonprofit advocacy organization that seeks to promote bipartisan political support for sustainable climate change solutions.
  • The Climate Reality Project: A multinational grassroots effort that seeks to “catalyze a global solution to the climate crisis by making urgent action a necessity across every level of society.”
  • Union of Concerned Scientists: Scientist-led organization that seeks to “develop and implement innovative, practical solutions to some of our planet’s most pressing problems.”

This brief was developed by U.S. RESIST NEWS environmental policy analyst Andrew Thornebrooke. Contact: andrew@thornebrooke.com

The Economic Consequences of a Government Shutdown

The Economic Consequences of a Government Shutdown

Brief #32—Economic Policy

Policy Summary
As the first week of 2019 comes to a close, the government shutdown shows no immediate signs of doing the same. Officially in its third week, the shutdown has progressed to the point that President Trump has stated that he may “declare a national emergency” if it continues. While government officials have confirmed that he technically has this power, it has also been acknowledged that such a measure would be extreme and would likely lead to further complications, not guaranteeing it would yield the results that Trump has proven he is so desperate for. According to Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff, such a tactic is ultimately faulty, as Trump would be unable to build the wall through national emergency declaration.

Since the shutdown was enacted, Trump has clung to his strategy of blaming the Democratic leaders for all problems that transpired since. Despite the $1.5 billion that was previously allocated for the wall, Trump seems insistent on sticking to his guns on his demand for  $5 million plus. The general consensus among Democratic congressmen and women seems to be that the Wall is unnecessary and a waste of funds. As it stands now, the current state of our government can only be described as a standoff.

Analysis
Meanwhile, things are growing progressively worse for federal workers. According to NPR, the shutdown has affected over 800,000 workers, many of whom are either being forced to work without pay or out of work completely. These workers are spread out among major federal agencies and departments, such as Homeland Security, Urban Development, Housing, Agriculture, and the Department of Treasury, among others. They account for roughly 1/4th of the federal government’s employees.

In the early days of the shutdown, economists indicated that it would likely not be too big of a deal for federal workers, provided it ended quickly. So far, though, the opposite has come to pass and as workers in different federal agencies, such as TSA and the National Park Service, are beginning to express anger at not being paid over a 3 week period. The  affected workers are either working without pay or seeing their work time furloughed, amounting to many hours not being counted toward the country’s GDP. The suspended paychecks of federal workers across the nation are likely to stem further problems for the general economy. Things such as eating out, retail purchases, mortgage payments, doctors’ visits, and traveling are consumer purchases that help make the economy tick.

It doesn’t help that the government shutdown has come at a time when markets have been increasingly turbulent. Major stock indexes, such as NASDAQ, have seen dramatic declines. When combined with   decreased consumer spending (see above), we are presented with a recipe for dramatic declines in investor confidence. This, in turn, can lead to a downward trend in 2019 first quarter economic growth. It was estimated that economic growth would be slow before the shutdown but now things may be worse.

Resistance Resources:

This Brief was submitted by U.S. RESIST NEWS Economic Po0licy Analyst Samuel.O. Brient:  contact Sam@usresistnews.org

Photo by Andy Feliciotti

Trump Administration Bans Bump Stocks

Trump Administration Bans Bump Stocks

Brief #15—Gun Control

Policy Summary
While the Trump Administration has typically echoed the NRA’s platforms, the acting Attorney General, Matthew Whitaker, signed a regulation on December 18th that banned bump stocks, a device that has the capability to turn semiautomatics into machine guns. The idea was first proposed by President Trump after the Parkland school shooting last February.

Analysis
Although President Trump first proposed the ban of bump stocks after the Parkland shooting last year, the debate over the legality of these devices took center stage in October of 2017 after the Las Vegas shooting occurred. Bump stocks aided the shooter by turning his gun into an automatic weapon which resulted in the deadliest shooting in United States’ history.

The regulation is expected to go into effect 90 days after it is published in the National Regiser and requires anyone owning a bump stock to turn it into an Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms office or destroy it. Owners have 90 days to turn in or destroy their devices and instructions will be posted on how to properly destroy the devices.

The ban may come as a surprise to some, as President Trump has been a strong supporter of both the Second Amendment and the NRA. Republican lawmakers, many of who receive campaign funds from the NRA, are outwardly opposed to any type of gun regulation. Trump’s action to ban bump stocks was not only progress towards sensible gun laws, but was also a symbolic step towards common sense gun control.

Engagement Resources

  • March For Our Lives – an organization started after the Parkland school shooting which aims to unify advocates for gun control around relevant issues. You can also find more information about the  Road to Change tour on their website. Consider donating or canvassing during the midterm elections on these issues with this organization.
  • Everytown – A movement of Americans working to end gun violence and build safer communities.
  • Vote.gov – A resource to utilize if you need to register, are unfamiliar with voter ID requirements, or election processes so you can be ready by November.

Contact

This Brief was written by U.S. RESIST NEWS Analyst Sarah Barton: Sarah@usresistnews.org

Photo by annie bolin

North Carolina Election Highlights Need To Prioritize Election Integrity

North Carolina Election Highlights Need To Prioritize Election Integrity

Brief #48—Civil Rights

Policy Summary
On November 6, 2018, the United States held its biennial federal elections. As dictated by the U.S. Constitution, every seat in the House of Representatives was up for election as well as the required 1/3 of the total Senate seats which meant thirty – three Senate seats were being contested (as well as an additional two seats due a special election being called for a total of thirty – five Senate seats being contested nationwide).

In North Carolina’s Ninth Congressional District the election was between Republican Mark Harris and Democrat Dan McCready. After the votes were tabulated, Mr. Harris had a 905 vote lead over Mr. McCready with more than 280,000 votes cast in the district.  Mr. McCready conceded the election the next day. However, the state Democratic Party in North Carolina soon after filed numerous affidavits with North Carolina’s Board of Elections alleging wrongdoing with regard to the election in North Carolina’s Ninth Congressional District and local elections in Bladen County. On November 30, 2018, in a unanimous vote, the Board of Elections announced that they would delay certifying the congressional election and declaring a winner due to “claims of irregularities and fraudulent activities.” They also announced that they voted 7 – 2 to hold a public hearing on December 21, 2018 “to assure that the election is determined without taint of fraud or corruption and without irregularities that may have changed the result.” LEARN MORE

Analysis: While the issue of voter suppression has focused primarily on the issues of gerrymandering, voter ID requirements and discriminatory tactics, other tactics are just as often used and should not be ignored. The 2018 election from North Carolina’s Ninth Congressional District and from nearby Bladen and Robeson Counties helps to illustrate how far some people will go to manipulate an election in order to have an outcome that they desire. The incidents are disturbing and has the potential to cast doubt not just on the integrity of North Carolina elections but on elections nationwide and the concept of democracy in the U.S.

In Bladen and Robeson counties, 3,400 absentee ballots were requested by voters but a high percentage were not completed and not mailed back. An analysis by the News & Observer found that many of the unreturned absentee ballots were from minority voters nearly 3 times more than from white voters who requested absentee ballots. This follows on the heels of Mr. Harris’ win in the primary election held in May where he won an astonishing 96 percent of all absentee ballots cast in Bladen County. Also, Bladen County voter Datesha Montgomery stated in a sworn statement that a woman came to her door and told her that she was collecting absentee ballots. Ms. Montgomery voted for two local elections and then was told by the woman to sign the envelope and that the woman told her that she would finish the voting on the absentee ballot for Ms. Montgomery. At least five other people have stated in sworn statements that people came to their doors and offered to fill out absentee ballots for them. These incidents occurred in neighborhoods that were primarily African – American. These are certainly troubling incidents and the Board of Elections made the right decision in delaying certification in the congressional race and in further investigating the allegations of irregularities and fraud. It is not about gerrymandering or voter ID but the incidents in North Carolina is still an assault on democratic principles and should be investigated so something like this will be prevented from happening again. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE 

Update: An investigation into irregularities and fraud in the North Carolina Ninth Congressional District continues with typical and unforeseen circumstances that still leaves the district without an official winner. Democrat Dan McReady, who originally lost the election, has accused Republican Mark Harris of not cooperating with investigators and is poised to fight in order to force a special election, which would essentially be a do – over of the November election. Mark Harris has tried to distance himself from Leslie Dowless, a campaign employee who has been accused of orchestrating the absentee ballot fraud. Mr. Dowless has a history of questionable campaign tactics concerning absentee ballot collection in the district going back to 2016. In the ensuing weeks after the November election, voters in the congressional district have claimed that they turned in their absentee ballots with only one witness signature although the ballots mysteriously ended up with two witness signatures. Another ballot was requested by a person who had been listed as deceased. And, absentee ballots were collected by people who were not “close relatives” which is illegal in North Carolina. As a result of these irregularities, the U.S. Congress has made clear that they would not seat Republican Mark Harris for the 116th Congress on January 3, 2019 until an investigation was completed.

Finally, the political atmosphere in North Carolina has complicated the issue as to whether the investigation will be completed at all. In October 2018, a state court ruled that North Carolina’s Board of Elections was unconstitutional as structured and ordered dissolved because of changes Republicans made to the board to limit the Democratic governor’s power. However, the board was permitted to remain in place in order to finish the investigation into the Ninth Congressional District race. However, the investigation dragged on and, fed up, the state court issued an order dissolving the Board of Elections on December 28, 2018. As a result, the congressional election between Mr. Harris and Mr. McReady cannot be certified. Governor Roy Cooper, a Democrat, has offered to create an interim board to handle the election investigation but Republicans have refused to cooperate with the interim board. A new Elections Board has been slated to be implemented on January 31, 2019 and Republicans have decided that they would rather deal with a permanent board instead of an interim Elections Board where the Republicans would have a minority of the seats on the five member board. The investigation, and the political wrangling in North Carolina, continues while the 116th Congress moves forward without a representative from North Carolina’s Ninth Congressional District. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE

Update #2: On February 21, 2019, the North Carolina State Board of Elections voted 5 – 0 to order a new election for North Carolina’s contested Ninth Congressional District. The upcoming election, which has not been scheduled yet, comes after four days of testimony from witnesses before the State Board of Elections. The hearings were being held to determine if the accusations of fraudulent activity required another election between Republican Mark Harris and Democrat Dan McCready.

Over the four days of the hearing, the State Board of Elections heard some shocking testimony from witnesses. On Monday Lisa Britt, the former step-daughter of Leslie Dowless the Republican operative accused of orchestrating an absentee ballot operation to steal votes for Republican candidates, testified that at her step – father’s direction she collected unsealed ballots, signed as a witness for ballots to which she was not a witness to and even signed other people’s names as a witness on a number of absentee ballots. She even filled out a number of the absentee ballots in local down ballot races, voting Republican in all races. All of her activities are illegal under North Carolina law. In addition, witnesses testified that the Bladen County Board of Elections might have improperly counted early, in-person ballots. Normal procedure is to collect early, in-person ballots and tabulate them on Election Day but these ballots were counted prior to that which raised another irregularity in the contested congressional district. And finally Republican Mark Harris, who was leading in the election by a 905 vote margin, testified before the North Carolina State Board of Elections that he knew of no illegal activity and then surprised all and called for a new election to be held. Mr. Harris had been against another election but finally agreed to call for a new election after listening to the testimony from the hearing. After Mr. Harris’s testimony, the State Board of Elections voted unanimously for a new election for the congressional seat from North Carolina’s Ninth Congressional District. The new election, which is the last undecided election from the 2018 midterms, will be scheduled in the near future. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE

Engagement Resources:

  • The Voter Participation Center – non – profit group dedicated to registering and mobilizing the American electorate.
  • HeadCount – non – profit group’s infopage on states voting information.
  • Vote.org – online guide with up to date information on voting rights.

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.

Photo by Element5 Digital

The Potential Impact of the New Congress on Education Policy

The Potential Impact of the New Congress on Education Policy

Brief #31—Education Policy

Policy Summary
Over the past two years, Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, has gone out of her way to roll back federal regulations, completely in tow with the Trump administration. Shortly after President Trump took office, the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights released a statement to agency investigators. The memo stated that the office would no longer recognize “systemic” bias in regards to individual claims of discrimination in schools, but instead they hoped to roll through individual cases at an even quicker speed than the previous administration. For civil right’s activist it raised red flags, but many were left remotely unconcerned. However, today, we now know this was an indication of the agency’s overall future approach toward issues of racial discrimination and civil rights execution.

Policy Analysis
According to ProPublica’s examination of approximately 40,000 civil rights cases, a mere fifteen months after President Trump took office, the department of education, closed over 1,200 Obama-era, civil rights investigations, lasting at least six months each. The closed investigations ranged from issues from discriminatory punishments to sexual assault. Under Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos, the policy changes had allowed the dismissal of over 500 disability rights accusations, by this past April. The changes from one administration to the next were night and day. Under President Obama’s administration nearly 70 percent of cases of discrimination toward students with limited English skills were upheld versus the 52 percent under the current administration. In general, the number of cases confirmed regarding the individualized educational needs of disabled students has dropped from 45 percent under the former administration to 34 percent this year. Sexual harassment and violence cases have also dropped by ten percent each.

Sadly, DeVos may be moving forward without much fuss as only 3% of Americans rank education at the top of their list of concerns our country faces. The silver lining of the year is that Democrats have assumed control of the House of Representatives as the result of this year’s midterm elections, for the first time in eight years. Democrats’ won the House but the Senate and White House  still remain under Republican power. Therefore, it is doubtful that there will be excessive changes in policies carried out by DeVos. Nevertheless, with control of committee chairs, there is much anticipation of House Democrats utilizing their oversight authority to compel DeVos to change direction in the upcoming year. In fact, a number of newly elected chairs have specifically indicated intentions to examine DeVos’ policies, using their oversight authority, giving many Americans hope the new year will welcome changes in how Washington manages education, especially the execution of civil rights for our children country-wide.

Americans can expect much debate over how DeVos has handled civil rights issues, primarily from Rep. Bobby Scott of Virginia. Rep. Scott, a former civil rights attorney, has made clear his determination to clearly answer whether the Department of Education is upholding its responsibilities to defend the civil rights of students throughout the United States. Currently, Scott serves as the Ranking Member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce. Previously, Scott has taken great initiative opposing the administration’s decisions on issues of racial bias in schools, overall civil rights and how investigations into systemic bias and discrimination have thus far been handled. Under Scott, the House Education and the Workforce committee is expected to look into  state plans to implement the successor to Every Student Succeeds Act, No Child Left Behind and to make sure any modifications are complicit with the law. Many civil rights groups, including the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, have argued that some of the plans implanted by DeVos do not live up to Every Student Succeeds Act’s protections for at-risk children.

There is no doubt DeVos is facing considerable pressure begot from oversight but this does not necessarily mean that DeVos will handle issues of civil rights in our school systems any differently than she has in the past. Thus far the Secretary has kept on the path of her and President Trump’s agenda, regardless of public opinion or setbacks. The president’s very open support of DeVos’ decisions may bolster the Secretary of Education, but the change in the House, especially in respects to Rep. Scott’s mission, will undeniably shake up issues and may cause DeVos to reconsider some of her policy decisions.

This Brief was posted by U.S. RESIST NEWS Education Policy Analyst Erin Mayer Contact: Erin@USResistNews.org

Photo by NeONBRAND

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