JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
Threats to the Affordable Care Act Amid Midterm Medicaid Success
Throughout the Trump Administration’s tenure, there has been an underlying campaign promise: dismantling and destroying the Affordable Care Act. Translation: cutting off healthcare to millions of families. The key policies in the administration have been to expand access to junk plans offered by insurance companies often out of the ACA marketplace, keep preexisting condition exclusion principles in place, and limit the reach of Medicare and Medicaid.
Immigration Policy Updates
During the past week, when many Americans gave thanks for their blessings, those making their way to the southern US border were faced with continuing hostility and exclusion. President Trump invoked similar rhetoric he used to impose the travel ban on countries with dominantly Muslim populations, in his most recent attempts to ban asylum to all individuals who cross the border illegally. A federal judge from San Francisco temporarily blocked the government from denying asylum to those crossing the southern border between ports of entry, which led to Trump criticizing the Justice Department for appealing his request as being biased and an “Obama judge.”
Noam Chomsky: How the US “Politically Vulgarizes” Genocide and War Crimes
Interview was originally posted on the website Truthout Noam Chomsky has revolutionized multiple fields of study, from psychology to linguistics to political science. With books such as Manufacturing Consent (with Edward S. Herman), The Fateful Triangle, Hegemony or...
Evidence Mounts of Trump Campaign Conspiracy with Russia, Anti-American Actors
By Jonathan Peter Schwartz Policy Summary Several revelatory developments emerged this week in the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. To be sure, they hardly reveal the full scope of what special counsel Robert Mueller and his team may know,...
Major U.S. Government Climate Assessment Ignored by U.S Government
Political controversy erupted this last black Friday, a day normally reserved for nonpolitical pursuits, such as bargain hunting and post-Thanksgiving family therapy.
New Trump Administration Attacks on LGBTQIA+ Community
Last month, Axios published an interview with Trump in which he suggested that there would be steps taken to ensure that gender identification from the federal government would be purely binary.
Betsy DeVos Proposed Title IX Changes
Department of Education Secretary, Betsy DeVos, has released several new policies in regards to how US colleges and universities will treat allegations of sexual harassment and assault. DeVos claims the current system in place has “failed” and is a “shameful” method that has been unfair to the students suspected of alleged crimes.
A U.S. RESIST NEWS SPECIAL REPORT; Trump’s League of Tyrants: A Guide to Authoritarian Leaders Around the World
By USRN Analysts Erin Mayer and Colin Shanley One of the most pervasive misreadings of the 2016 election is that Trump is simply an aberration who somehow slipped through the cracks of our otherwise stable institutions, and into a position of power. This view of Trump...
The Industry of Voting: How the Practice of Stealth Politics Serves to Undermine American Democracy
The recent midterm elections have cast a new light on an area of politics that has become increasingly more concerning since Donald Trump first took office in 2017–that of money in politics.
Work Requirements for Medicaid
Letter issued on January 11, 2018
Note: This brief updates previous entitlement programs briefs. For more information, please see the April 12, 2017 brief on work requirements for Medicaid.
Summary
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a letter on January 11th allowing states to impose work requirements for Medicaid eligibility. Eight states, (AR, AZ, IN, KS, ME, NH, UT, and WI) have pending requests for work requirements as a condition for Medicaid eligibility and CMS has already approved Kentucky’s weaver. Previous administrations did not approve work requirements for Medicaid because the guidelines do not align with the program’s purpose of promoting health care coverage. The letter asserts that the new policy assists “states in their efforts to improve Medicaid enrollee health and well-being through incentivizing work and community engagement.” LEARN MORE
Analysis
Six in 10 nonelderly adults that receive Medicaid benefits are already working. Most of the remaining recipients are not working due to illness, disability, school, or caregiving responsibility, leaving only 7% of nonelderly, Medicaid eligible adults subject to work requirements. Even so, all recipients would have to verify that they are working, looking for a job, or training for employment. States would need to pay for the staff and administrative processes to enforce work requirements. Some eligible recipients may lose coverage due to miscommunication or paperwork errors. In many states, working at minimum wage to adhere to Medicaid work requirements would cause recipients to lose Medicaid eligibility because they would earn too much to qualify. LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
- Contact Your State Officials – Voice your opinion on the matter to the people who make these important decisions!
- Families USA – Learn more about Medicaid and how it affects families. Families USA supports the expansion of Medicaid to boost state economies and strengthen the health care system.
This brief was compiled by Ann Furbush. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief please contact ann@usresistnews.org.
MoneyGram, AT&T Deals Blocked as US Talks Tough on Chinese Investment
January 19, 2018
Summary
Citing potential “malicious actors” and national security risks, early in the new year the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States (CFIUS) rejected Alibaba Group Holding affiliate Ant Financial’s $1.2b bid to purchase MoneyGram International, a Dallas-based money transfer company. With the deal derailed after a year of negotiations, Ant must now pay a $30m termination fee.
One week later, on January 9, Chinese telecom company Huawei announced that plans to sell its smartphones with AT&T in the United States had also collapsed. After lobbying the CFIUS to scrap the deal, US lawmakers urged AT&T, the second largest wireless carrier, to cut all ties with Huawei, warning that if they or other American firms do business with Huawei, they might find US government contracts awarded elsewhere.
In a signal of cooperation with American regulators, the Chinese Ministry of Industry and Information Technology reprimanded Alibaba and two other top Chinese tech firms for “inadequate” policies relating to personal information protection, calling for an investigation and vowing that any violations would be “severely punished.” Alibaba’s Alipay was singled out by Chinese cyber regulators over user complaints of automatic enrollment in the company’s credit rating program, which gives Alipay access to a wide array of user data.
It remains to be seen how this chilling effect on Chinese investment will impact the long-anticipated sale of Virginia-based insurer Genworth Financial. The $2.7b acquisition deal with privately held conglomerate China Oceanwide Holdings Group — which acquired the American tech publishing pioneer, data analysis and venture capital firm International Data Group last year— has been stalled repeatedly, by lawsuits and by CFIUS concerns over protection of customers’ personal medical and financial data. The sale, now postponed until April 1, would help Genworth cope with $600 million in debt maturing in May of this year.
Analysis
Acquisitions of U.S.companies by Chinese investors face greater suspicion and scrutiny under the Trump administration, in an atmosphere of increased tensions between the two nations, especially over North Korea’s nuclear program.
But concerns over Chinese policy of requiring firms to hand over key technologies in order to gain access to Chinese markets, corporate espionage, and the Chinese government’s failure to crack down on intellectual property theft, are nothing new.
What’s new is an unprecedented global buying spree on the part of Chinese investors. As a condition of acceptance into the World Trade Organizaition (WTO) in 2001, China agreed to a number of economic reforms that would open its markets to outside competition. Its economy progressed at an impressive pace, as American companies bought up cheap wholesale Chinese products and raced for market position in what has become the 2nd largest economy in the world. China invested roughly $64 billion in the US between 1990 and 2015. But with the release of its Made in China 2025 plan in 2015 — a blueprint for upgrading the country’s manufacturing sector which is seen by many as a “return to old-school top-down mercantilist practices and import-substitution policies” — China’s US-investments surged to $45.6 billion in 2016 alone, with California tech, entertainment, real estate and logistics being the largest recipients at a combined total of $16b.
In spite of Washington’s concerns over technology transfer that may have military applications, such as AI and robotics, and dismay over personal data protections, censorship laws, and a burgeoning surveillance state, Silicon Valley has continued to court China for market growth and partnerships. Chinese investors are giving start-ups more favorable terms, while tech firms argue that engagement is better than withdrawal if America is to stay competitive in emerging markets and innovation.
Signaling a new hard-line approach during Trump’s state visit to Beijing last November, Washington lawmakers introduced a bill to revamp the CFIUS to close gaps in its review process against “weaponizing” investment by “potential adversaries, such as China.” Although reform of the committee is long overdue, backlog and delays are in part a result of Trump’s inability to fill mid-level political positions in key agencies comprising the CFIUS.
While national security and the notion of reciprocity deserve our attention, Washington’s bellicose tone, punctuated by Trump’s incendiary rhetoric and erratic tweets about both China and North Korea, sabotage diplomatic efforts in an already complicated and sensitive relationship with China. As Trump blusters to gratify a xenophobic and intolerant segment of his “base” and to push his America First agenda forward, the rest of the world seems poised to look elsewhere for leadership.
Engagement Resources
- US-China Policy Foundation provides opportunities for students, researchers, and practitioners of foreign policy to interact in diverse and substantial ways to promote greater understanding and awareness of issues in US-China relations.
- The Paul Tsai China Center is dedicated to helping advance China’s legal reform, improving US-China relations, and increasing understanding of China in the United States.
This brief was compiled by Jennifer Chesworth. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief please contact jennifer@usresistnews.org.
Trump’s Derogatory Comment Curtails Immigration Efforts
January 12, 2018
Summary
On Thursday, January 11, President Trump reportedly asked during a bipartisan meeting on immigration reform, “Why are we having people from all of these shithole countries here?” in reference to Haiti, El Salvador, and African countries. Trump would later go on to say that Haitians should be left out of any future immigration legislation. Following these remarks, Trump suggested that the United States bring in more people from countries like Norway, or from Asian countries, who he deemed would support and strengthen the country’s economy.
To further complicate the situation, lawmakers who were present at the meeting, like Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen, and the President himself, are denying that he ever used the term “shithole” to describe the aforementioned nations that were brought up specifically in regard to Temporary Protected Status (TPS) removals enacted by the Department of Homeland Security last week and in November.
Analysis
From a lawmaking standpoint, in addition to feeling discouraged about the prospects of reaching a bipartisan deal on immigration, members of Congress are also concerned that the contested debate over immigration policy could result in a government shutdown as deadlines loom with no compromise. More specifically, this means that if lawmakers cannot agree on a budget for this fiscal year, many federal agencies will cease activity after midnight on Friday indefinitely until a spending bill is agreed upon by Democrats and Republicans alike.
From a humanistic standpoint, this rhetoric used by the President demonstrates his normalization of racism and bigotry in public spheres. Trump supporters laud their leader for using language they themselves would use to describe the aforementioned countries from the likes of Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh. Should the President continue to use this language, more acts of hate and violence will persist, and the reality of reaching a deal on programs like DACA, TPS, and the Diversity Visa Lottery Program, will cease to exist.
Engagement Resources
- Act with America’s Voice: America’s Voice is a progressive immigration reform nonprofit that advocates for full and equal rights of all immigrants. The organization runs numerous campaigns, maps incidents of hate against people of color, and assists with voter registration, amongst other activities essential to promoting equity for immigrant lives in the United States. You can make a contribution to America’s Voice here.
- Support the New Americans Campaign: The New Americans Campaign is a national, nonpartisan network of immigrant organizations, legal service providers, faith-based organizations, faith-based organizations, immigrant rights groups, foundations, and community leaders. A project by the Immigration Legal Resource Center, the campaign is committed to connecting lawful permanent residents to trusted legal assistance. Click here to support the campaign.
- Stay Up to Date with the National Immigration Forum: The National Immigration Forum is a DC-based nonprofit that leads the nation in constructive conversation and advocacy for the value of immigrants and immigration. The Forum is currently running a program called Immigration 2020, a multi-constituency effort to ensure that new Americans have the opportunities, skills, and status they need to contribute to the United States and realize their maximum potential. Join the organization’s email list to stay up to date on all things related to immigration policy.
This brief was compiled by Allie Blum. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief please contact allie@usresistnews.org.
The House of Representatives Vote on Extension of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and Proposed Privacy Protections For Americans
House of Representatives Action
January 11, 2018
Summary
On January 11, 2018, the House of Representatives voted on two bills regarding warrantless surveillance programs in the United States. S.139, popularly known as the FISA Amendments Reauthorization Act of 2017 was approved by the House by a vote of 256 – 164. That bill reauthorizes FISA for an additional six years and does not make any substantive changes to the law. Another bill, known as the USA Rights Act, proposed stricter limits and additional protections and was introduced as an amendment that would have replaced the text of S.139. However, this amendment failed by a vote of 183 – 233. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE
Analysis
The vote on the two bills taken by the House of Representatives was a double-dose of disappointment. First, the approval of S.139 is an approval and extension of FISA without any substantive changes to the law at all, especially the controversial Section 702. That law was initially designed to collect electronic communications of a foreign target (person) so long as that target was overseas. However, the sweeping up of these electronic communications inadvertently collected the communications of U.S. citizens that were then stored in a database. Even if an American citizen was not targeted for surveillance, the accumulation of their electronic communications was allowed to be retained in this database and made available for search without a warrant by law enforcement and national security agencies. The disappointment of the House vote is that the law was renewed without any changes addressing the concerns of this surveillance program and its effect on American citizens.
What made the day even more frustrating was that the House had an amendment before it that contained proposals to improve Section 702 and other surveillance programs and instead the chamber voted to not approve the amendments. The USA Rights Act offered substantive reforms that would have fixed some of the troubling aspects of Section 702. Specifically, the USA Rights Act would not allow a search into the Section 702 database of American citizens without a warrant. And it would have banned the controversial “about” search clause that allows the government to look at any electronic communication of an American if their name is mentioned in the communication even if the citizen did not send or receive the message. The House of Representatives had a real chance to improve the surveillance program but instead voted down much needed changes and simply rubber stamped the original statute without addressing the known defects. The bill will now be sent to the Senate where it is expected to pass. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
- American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) – statement on House vote.
- Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) – description of USA Rights Act voted down by the House.
- Brennan Center for Justice – factsheet on government surveillance programs.
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.
Federal Judge Blocks DACA Phaseout
January 10, 2018
Policy Summary
On Tuesday, January 9, US District Judge William Alsup in San Francisco blocked the Trump administration’s attempt to terminate DACA. Alsup quoted the President himself in his 49-page court order. The quote came from Twitter of course, which Trump had composed less than two weeks following the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) decision to rescind the program, questioning why anyone would “throw out good, educated and accomplished young people.” For Judge Alsup, this sentiment summarizes why ending DACA is unconstitutional. Judge Alsup went on to write that it is not up to the current administration to determine if a former administration’s policies were illegally formed, which was DHS’ so-called main motivation for rescinding the program last September.
Analysis
The decision to terminate DACA was previously analyzed in another U.S. RESISTNEWS brief. To reiterate those points, similar to the analyses of administration decisions to end TPS for recipients from Haiti, and El Salvador, there is an obvious economic impact that would result from the deportation of hundreds of thousands of hardworking individuals who have lived, worked, studied, grown up, paid taxes, and started families in America, but there are even more dire moral implications for the reasons driving these decisions, which demonstrate a flagrant disregard for human life that is not White.
Engagement Resources
- Act with Here to Stay: Here to Stay is a campaign run by United We Dream aimed at defending DACA. The organization hosts local Defend DACA rallies and other events, holds community calls, and provides resources for understanding DACA, as well as mental health resources for anyone who is affected by the administration’s decision to end DACA.
- Support the National Immigration Law Center: Since 1979, NILC has been exclusively dedicated to defending low-income immigrants. Through impact litigation, policy analysis and advocacy, and strategic communications, NILC advances the rights of those who came to the US in search of a better life. You can support NILC’s mission by donating or attending one of their training or educational events.
- Show Your Solidarity with the Immigrant Legal Resource Center: ILRC is a national nonprofit resource center that provides immigration legal trainings, technical assistance, and educational materials, as well as engages in advocacy and immigrant civic engagement to advance immigrant rights. You can show your solidarity with ILRC by making a contribution to the center or attending a virtual or in-person ILRC training.
This brief was compiled by Allie Blum. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief please contact allie@usresistnews.org.
Trump Administration Ends TPS for 200,000 Salvadorans
January 8, 2018
Policy Summary
On Monday, January 8, the Trump administration announced that it would be ending Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for some 200,000 Salvadorans living in the United States. This decision comes just weeks after the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) ended the TPS program for recipients from Nicaragua and Haiti. Those from El Salvador living in the United States under TPS were admitted to the US in 2001 following a pair of deadly earthquakes that struck the country, completing upending the infrastructure of El Salvador. Since then, TPS has been extended to those from El Salvador 11 times by Democrats and Republicans alike as the infrastructure remained in recovery and incidences of crime and violence became threateningly prevalent.
In spite of pleas from the Salvadoran government to allow its citizens to remain in the US under TPS, DHS is ending the program after finding that the “original conditions of the 2001 earthquake no longer exist in the country,” according to the New York Times. TPS will effectively end for the Salvadoran population in September of 2019.
Analysis
Ending TPS for the Salvadoran community is inherently counterintuitive to Trump’s “Make America Great Again” mantra, for kicking these upstanding individuals out of the United States is going to do the country more harm than good, particularly when viewed from an economic lens. According to a study done by the Center for Migration Studies (CMS), 88% of Salvadorans living in the United States participate in the workforce (compared to 63% of the American population). Forcibly removing this significant portion of the US labor force is going negatively impact the country’s economy, especially in industries (e.g., construction, restaurant/ food services, landscaping) and states (e.g., California, Texas, Florida, New York, Virginia, and Maryland) where Salvadorans have greater representation.
Putting politics and partisanship aside, it is equally important to view this particular issue within immigration through a humanistic lens. At our core, Salvadorans, Americans, and people from any country are simply that: people. The people who came here from El Salvador to escape the carnage of natural disaster, economic strife, and gang violence are here to make a better life for themselves, their families, and to contribute to a land and economy that they are grateful to be a part of. In the near 17 years that have passed since Salvadorans were granted TPS in the US, 61% had at least one U.S.-born child (according to the same CMS study linked above). This means that these children have never lived, and in many cases, never been to El Salvador, are American citizens, and only know to call America “home.” Ending TPS will force the parents of these children to make the heart-wrenching decision to bring their children to a dangerous and unfamiliar land for the sake of family preservation, or split up the family so that the children can maintain the way of life they have become accustomed to in America.
Congress is responding to this decision with a bill that would allow Salvadorans here under TPS to apply for permanent residency. The bill has been introduced by Rep. Mike Cauffman (R-CO), who considers himself a centrist on immigration issues. A similar bill, named the ESPERER Act, sponsored by Rep. Carols Curbelo (R-FL), would allow Haitians and Nicaraguans, in addition to Salvadorans, to apply for permanent residency, according to Countable. These pieces of legislation, drafted by GOP lawmakers, demonstrates that members of Congress from both sides of the aisle are looking to come together in support of these communities for the betterment of the US and everyone living and working in a country founded on the principles of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”
Engagement Resources
- Act with America’s Voice: America’s Voice is a progressive immigration reform nonprofit that advocates for full and equal rights of all immigrants. The organization runs numerous campaigns, maps incidents of hate against people of color, and assists with voter registration, amongst other activities essential to promoting equity for immigrant lives in the United States. You can make a contribution to America’s Voice here.
- Support the Center for Migration Studies: The Center for Migration Studies is a think-tank and educational institute devoted to the study of international migration, to the promotion of understanding between immigrants and receiving communities, and to public policies that safeguard the dignity and rights of migrants, refugees and newcomers. You can support the institute through purchasing its publications or attending an event.
- Stay Up to Date with the National Immigration Forum: The National Immigration Forum is a DC-based nonprofit that leads the nation in constructive conversation and advocacy for the value of immigrants and immigration. The Forum is currently running a program called Immigration 2020, a multi-constituency effort to ensure that new Americans have the opportunities, skills, and status they need to contribute to the United States and realize their maximum potential. Join the organization’s email list to stay up date on all things related to immigration policy.
This brief was compiled by Allie Blum. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief please contact allie@usresistnews.org.
Trump Administration Asks Congress for $18 Billion for Border Wall Construction
January 5, 2018
Policy Summary
On Friday, January 5, the Trump Administration announced that it would be seeking $18 billion from Congress over the next ten years for border wall construction. This price tag is estimated to cover an additional 316 miles of new fencing and reinforce another 407 miles with barriers already in place, according to the Washington Post. Should Congress approve this request and the construction is complete, nearly half of the US-Mexico border will be separated by “the wall” by 2027. The $18 billion cost of construction, which is estimated by the US Customs and Border Protection (CBP), does not include additional costs for personnel training, border technology, and building access to roads, bringing the total cost of border construction and maintenance to $33 billion. Other agencies within the Department of Homeland Security are also expected to request funding for wall construction, which is not included in the aforementioned estimate.
Analysis
Trump’s wall, and more generally—a total crackdown on immigration—is perhaps the largest and most central promise to his isolationist campaign. The CBP funding proposal is a crucial, concrete (literally) step in realizing the actual construction of said wall following prototype construction that broke ground in late September of 2017. Though Mexicans will not be funding the construction of the wall, the follow-throughs that Trump has made thus far demonstrate that he is not “all talk” when it comes to even his most ridiculous, outlandish, and dangerous ideas. While Democratic members of Congress, and even a few Republicans, are unwaveringly against constructing and funding a border wall, it is too soon to be dismissive of the possibility that the wall’s construction could be actualized until Congress sets forth the fiscal budgetary levels for Fiscal Years 2019-2027.
Engagement Resources
- Act with America’s Voice: America’s Voice is a progressive immigration reform nonprofit that advocates for full and equal rights of all immigrants. The organization runs numerous campaigns, maps incidents of hate against people of color, and assists with voter registration, amongst other activities essential to promoting equity for immigrant lives in the United States. You can make a contribution to America’s Voice here.
- Support Alliance San Diego: Alliance SD is nonprofit responsible for creating the Souther Border Communities Coalition (see below) and organizes other coalitions to promote justice and social change in San Diego. You can support Alliance SD through making a contribution, volunteering with the organization, or attending an Alliance SD event.
- Stay Up to Date with Southern Border Communities Coalition: SBCC formed in 2011 and has brought over 60 organizations together to ensure fair border enforcement, promote policy, and solutions improving quality of life in border regions, and support humane immigration reform. Follow the SBCC Newsroom for updates on information pertaining to the border wall and its impact on communities in proximity to the border.
This brief was compiled by Allie Blum. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief please contact allie@usresistnews.org.
Trump Administration Cracks Down on Legal Marijuana
January 4, 2018
Summary
Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that the Department of Justice would reestablish federal marijuana laws as a priority. His announcement goes against the Obama-era Cole Memo guidelines that deprioritized enforcing federal marijuana laws and gave states the freedom to establish their own legislation. The new memo stirred confusion in the states that have already legalized recreational use of marijuana, such as California where cannabis became legal just a few days before Session’s announcement. Users in states where marijuana is legal will not have trouble with state officials but could be prosecuted by federal officials. This contradiction has stirred fear and confusion in the booming industry. It is still unclear how the changes will affect medical marijuana. LEARN MORE
Analysis
Some entrepreneurs think Session’s action was more of a political show than an actual threat. Sessions has always been a strong opponent to marijuana and is quoted comparing cannabis to heroin and saying “good people don’t smoke marijuana” and that he thought the KKK was “OK until I found out they smoked pot.” Many feel that marijuana regulation should be similar to that of alcohol because marijuana is safer than alcohol and even has some health benefits. A Gallup Poll recently revealed that a record 64% of Americans support marijuana legalization. Executive director of the Drug and Policy Alliance Maria McFarland Sanchez-Moreno points out that marijuana legalization is much more popular than Sessions or Trump and she expects it to outlive them both. LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
- NORML – Working to reform marijuana laws and keep legalization a state issue.
- Marijuana Policy Project – Working to make marijuana policy more like alcohol policy and reduce or eliminate penalties for marijuana use.
- As always, contact your state’s elected officials and voice your concerns or support.
This brief was compiled by Ann Furbush. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief please contact ann@usresistnews.org.
Increased Oversight on HHS Word hoice and EPA employees
Health & Human Services Guidance
2018-2019 Budget Proposal Meeting
Summary
In a recent budget preparation meeting, members of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), a subset of the Division of Health & Human Services (HHS), were informed that a list of seven words were not to be used in budgets and budget proposals. These seven words were “vulnerable,” “entitlement,” “diversity,” “transgender,” “fetus,” “evidence-based” and “science-based.” In some cases, alternate phrases were suggested, such as “the CDC bases its recommendations on science in consideration with community standards and wishes,” while no alternatives were given for many others. Policy analysts in the original meeting reported these new restrictions, but the administration has pushed back saying that nothing has been officially “banned” and the complaints are unfounded. The Secretary of HHS and the Under Secretary of the CDC have made statements saying that their interest is the health of the American people, and they cannot live up to this mandate without the proper vocabulary, let alone proper evidence.
In another measure of increased restrictions, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is in the process of negotiating a new contract with a media monitoring organization, Definers Public Affairs. Pruitt and the EPA claim that Definers has been hired to do press clips and keep track of media affairs worldwide. However, recent events suggest that EPA employees are being monitored, especially those critical of Secretary Pruitt. In a report recently published by the New York Times, emails containing the names of Mr. Pruitt or Mr. Trump were read and analyzed by a lawyer for America Rising, a Republican Research group affiliated with Definers Public Affairs. These emails were requested and obtained after employees spoke out in meetings, disagreed with decision making or attended public demonstrations. There is a cruel irony in these increased restrictions as the President opens public and protected lands for oil drilling, mining, and even fracking.
Analysis
If the HHS and CDC have restricted words for their budget proposals, then so do the thousands of researchers, universities, and organizations that apply for and receive funding from HHS and its affiliates. This includes the National Institute of Health (NIH), which supplies funding for a variety of medical research. Banning words like science-based and evidence-based is alarming in a field where evidence and science drive daily decisions. However, words like “Trans” and “Fetus” target areas of research, such as the health and outcomes of trans youth. While there has been little official documentation of these banned words and phrases, already HHS affiliates are preparing to do what it takes to continue their work. Whether their emails come under scrutiny next is still unknown.
Outrage ensued after the report was released by the New York Times, and more evidence was discovered regarding video monitoring and Definers Public Affairs’ early support of Pruitt. The EPA announced that it was canceling its contract with Definers Public Affairs. Both parties said that this company’s efficiency would have saved the EPA money, but it isn’t worth the accusations that have arisen. At this point, a new firm has not been announced and officials say the search continues.
Engagement Resources
- Read the Full New York Times Report on EPA Employee Email Monitoring
- Learn more about the HHS budget
This brief was compiled by Megan Toney. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief please contact megan@usresistnews.org.
State Department Suspends Aid to Pakistan
January 9, 2018
Summary
This past Thursday the State Department announced the cancellation of hundreds of millions of dollars in security aid for Pakistan. The point of contention is Pakistan’s continued alleged hesitance to cut ties to terrorist organizations such as The Taliban and The Haqqani network. Pakistan has been accused of providing a safe haven and even funding for these groups, who are both currently fighting NATO forces in Afghanistan. While the exact dollar amount to be withheld is yet to be announced, the State Department has made it clear that the money will not be re-appropriated, and will be returned upon renewed commitment to fight terror by the Pakistani government.
The announcement, preceded with a signature furious tweet from the President, had all the trappings of another erratic departure from historic US foreign policy. However, this is instead another advancement in a long history of contention between the two countries. President Reagan’s administration worked with Pakistan to fuel militant Islamist groups to fight Soviet influence in Afghanistan. Only a year after their victory in 1989, the US sanctioned Pakistan to discourage their pursuit of a nuclear arms program. Following 9/11, the United States found renewed interest in a Pakistani alliance and resumed funding. In 2011, the Obama administration suspended $800 million in military aid shortly after finding Osama bin Laden hiding just three hours outside of Islamabad. In 2015, $300 million of Pentagon funding was made conditional on Pakistan acting against the Haqqani network in Afghanistan.
Analysis
While cutting funding to settle a dispute is classic of the Trump playbook, we may find that the United States does not have much leverage in this case. Pakistan has been a valuable asset for the US military in the war in Afghanistan. The Karachi port is an invaluable supply line and the US also uses Pakistani bases to launch drone strikes. The Pakistani military and intelligence community hold a strong influence over the civilian government, and according to the former Pakistani ambassador to the US Husain Haqqani, “Pakistan’s military has convinced itself that it is acting in Pakistan’s national interest and that pursuing that interest is more important than U.S. aid.” Anti-American sentiment is rampant among the Pakistani populace, and bending to the will of Trump would not be a popular move in a country heading towards a general election in July. Islamabad issued a statement calling for “mutual respect and trust along with patience and persistence”, but opposition leader Imran Khan insisted that it was “time for Pakistan to delink from the US.” China, which already provides investment for a $60 billion infrastructure program in Pakistan, is promising to grant further support. The two countries have maintained a long and fruitful relationship, while the Pakistani foreign minister described the United States as the “friend who always betrays”. There’s a good chance this may be the final straw for Pakistan.
Engagement Resources
- Read the State Department’s Extended Explanation: Here is the State Department’s briefing
- Read More About Pakistan’s Relationship With China: Here is an article by Al Jazeera on The Strategic Importance of Chinese-Pakistani Relations
This brief was compiled by Colin Shanley. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief please contact colin@usresistnews.org.
