JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
Trump Administration’s Latest Intimidation Tactics used in the UN to Crush Pro-Breastfeeding Resolution
Early this month, the Trump Administration bullied other delegates into changing a World Health Organization resolution supporting the endorsement of breastfeeding in countries. The administration has been proven to have ties to companies producing breastfeeding alternatives, and this resolution would have dramatically hurt business in many developed countries.
Zero Tolerance Policy and the Mental Health Cost for Migrants
On June 27th, the Supreme Court voted 5-4 to uphold the legality of anti-abortion or “pregnancy crisis” clinics. Currently, there are 3,000 clinics in operation around the country. Because of the prevalence of these centers, women will not be adequately counseled by healthcare professionals on their current breadth of choices surrounding termination of unwanted pregnancies.
Supporters and Opponents of the Investigation Dig In: Part 1
The past few months have seen several significant developments in the investigation into collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government, which has loomed over American politics since the 2016 election. As the number of indictments grows, so too does...
Federal Appeals Court Opinion Insulates TSA Officers From Civil Liability
The lengthy decision by the Court of Appeals is a curious one and one that has the potential to lead to unwanted consequences. In its opinion, the court’s reasoning turned on how a transportation security officer was classified. Under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), the federal government and its employees are immune from civil or criminal liability under the doctrine of sovereign immunity except in specific circumstances.
Early Effects of Trade War Caused by Trump Administration
These international tariffs are not designed to only target agricultural companies, though. Some U.S. companies are feeling the impact of the steel and aluminum tariffs more than once. Florida-based boat manufacturer Correct Craft has been affected by both domestic and global tariffs. The Trump administration’s aluminum tariffs have also led to increases in prices of the American-manufactured steel used by many boat makers, as have the retaliatory tariffs imposed by international competitors, leading to a decrease in revenue and with it, a loss of opportunity to expand operations and hire more workers.
Pruitt Resigns, Becoming Trump’s Fifth Cabinet Member to Call It Quits
Amid months of investigation for as many as 19 scandals, Scott Pruitt resigned his post as the Secretary of the Environmental Protection Agency on Thursday, July 5th. Many rejoiced that this enabler of deregulation had finally given up his position, but the administration has a very different story. Trump announced Pruitt’s resignation in a tweet where he thanked Pruitt for his service and congratulated him on an “outstanding job
Supreme Court Upholds Travel Ban: Institutionalized Discrimination
On June 26, 2018, the Supreme Court officially voted to uphold Trump’s travel ban that has been on his agenda since the early days of his presidency. Now, there are travel restrictions on individuals coming from Iran, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, North Korea
Affirmative Action: Rescinding Obama-Era Policies
Trump administration is rescinding seven Obama-era policies which encouraged schools to look at race as one among many factors in admissions. The seven affirmative action policies are among 24 documents rescinded on the Department of Justice’s website. The DOE/DOJ claim that the documents advocate policy preferences beyond the requirements of the Constitution
China Prepares to Shield Economy from Effects of U.S. Trade War
Recent reports indicate that China has temporally ceased its work on the structural reforms on national economic systems and is shifting its focus to policies that are more geared to supporting general economic growth.
GOP Health Care Dead Again
Failed Legislation
Failed on July 18, 2017
Policy Summary
On Tuesday, the GOP accepted another defeat on the healthcare front, conceding once again to “let Obamacare fail” on its own. This conclusion comes after a delay due to lack of support, a delay due to John McCain’s medical leave, a few unpopular amendments with hopes of rallying Republican support, and even a repeal and replace later effort. The CBO estimated that repealing the ACA with no replacement plan would leave 32 million more people without health insurance by 2026, including 19 million people covered by Medicaid. Three Senate Republicans quickly opposed a repeal with no replacement plan, leaving the GOP out of ideas. President Donald Trump blames the latest health care failure on Democrats, saying neither he nor the Republican Party will “own it”. LEARN MORE
Analysis
No matter where President Trump or GOP leaders point blame, the healthcare failure ultimately comes from a lack of unity and leadership. Even after 7 years of “Repeal and replace Obamacare” echoing from Republican Congressmen and even with a Republican majority in both the House and Senate, GOP leaders remain unable to unite their divided party. The Senate will vote next week on a repeal of Obamacare with no replacement. With all 48 Democrats and a handful of Republicans opposing a clean repeal, it is apparent that Obamacare will remain for now. However, the Trump Administration and GOP have already “given up” on health care once, so it is very possible they will come back to healthcare soon. As Trump said on Tuesday regarding the next step for health care, “Stay tuned”. LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
- Center on Budget and Policy Priorities – Learn more about what the Senate health bill would mean, who would lose, what the amendments changed, and more.
- Swing Left – This site tracks districts where House winners won by thin margins and encourages voters to vote Democrat in the 2018 election to restore a progressive majority. This is crucial for every aspect of politics, including health care because Congress has a huge impact on what bills become laws.
- As always, contact your state’s elected officials and voice your concerns.
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.
Disapproval of Waste Prevention, Production Subject to Royalties, and Resource Conservation
Failed Legislation
Passed in the House on February 3, 2017
Defeated in the Senate on May 10, 2017
Update: July 3, 2017
After the GOP failed attempt to reverse the Obama-era methane flaring restriction, Donald Trump attacked the rule using his energy plan, and EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt placed a two-year moratorium on the rule’s enforcement. On July 3rd a federal appeals court ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency cannot suspend rule and must begin enforcing it.
Update: May 10, 2017
May 10th produced a surprising win for environmental groups when the Republican bid to reverse the Obama-era environmental regulation died in the Senate. Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) unexpectedly joined fellow Republicans Susan Collins (Maine) and Lindsey Graham (S.C.) to kill the legislation in a 49-51 vote. GOP/Trump administration officials have said they will now shift their focus to rewriting the rule in the Interior Department and using Trump’s energy plan to target the regulation (Trump’s energy plan/EO and its impending effect on the methane flaring regulation are detailed here).
Summary
A bill disapproving of (and effectively nullifying) the Bureau of Land Management’s Waste Prevention, Production Subject to Royalties, and Resource Conservation rule recently passed in the House and was introduced in the Senate. The rule went into effect in the closing days of the Obama administration. It enacted regulations to reduce methane emissions and wasted gas, and it replaced provisions that are over thirty years old. Republican lawmakers in favor of the disapproval argue that new regulations put expensive burdens on the energy industry harming business. LEARN MORE
Analysis
The waste prevention regulations nullified by the GOP bill are projected to reduce wasteful venting, flaring, and leaking of natural gas into the atmosphere from oil and gas operations on public and indigenous lands. The Department of the Interior points out that new technology enables businesses to reduce waste and capture oil and gas for economic revenue. The department’s fact sheet estimates that federal taxpayers miss out on $23 million annually in royalty payments from waste, and that wasted gas is enough to supply over 6 million households per year. The Obama Era rule also protects the environment, cutting emissions of methane (a harmful greenhouse gas 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide) by 35%. Additionally, environmental and public health organizations have noted that the rule will “reduce risk of asthma attacks, cancers, heart and other lung problems, neurological disorders, and birth defects related to emissions from oil and gas operations.”
Engagement Resources
- Natural Resources Defense Council – An international nonprofit environmental advocacy group committed to fighting Trump’s “environmental assault” and providing individuals with avenues for taking action.
- Clean Air Task Force – A nonprofit organization dedicated to reducing atmospheric pollution through research, advocacy, and private sector collaboration.
- The Wilderness Society – A nonprofit land conservation organization that is dedicated to protecting natural areas and federal public lands in the United States.
This brief was compiled by Conor Downey. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief please contact conor@usresistnews.org.
Trump Administration Quietly Implementing Muslim Ban Through Changes in Immigration Policy
Agency Level Policy Reviews and Executive Orders
Ongoing
Policy Summary
As the courts have nullified Trump’s ability to ban immigration from Muslim majority countries outright, the Trump Administration has used other methods, not currently under judicial review, to drastically lower Muslim immigration. The methods have included agency level policy reviews. An example of this is the State Department’s invoking of an emergency review of visa application vetting procedures from countries with “increased security risks”. This then allows the State Department to require applicants to submit years worth of personal information, making the process for obtaining a visa to the United States (which is already the longest and most comprehensive in the world) even more arduous. The Trump Administration’s methods also include executive action, such as the Executive Order issued on June 21st of this year that needlessly walks back on an Obama Administration’s commitment to limiting all visa application interviews to 3 weeks after the application is submitted. Additionally, in the name of “extreme vetting,” the Trump Administration issued an executive order asking for governmental agencies associated with immigration to review their policies in order to prevent “foreign terrorist entry”.
Analysis
The results of the Trump Administration’s efforts have unfortunately been successful, as nonimmigrant visas granted to those from 50 Muslim-majority countries were down 20% this April compared to April 2016. Additionally, visas granted to citizens of the six nations that encompassed the infamous second travel ban executive order, were down a staggering 55% last March compared to the preceding year. The effectiveness these steps will have on combating terrorism is highly suspect, as since 9/11 the vast majority of terrorist attacks committed in the United States have been perpetrated by American citizens. In fact, the risk of an attack will most likely be heightened through the demonization and alienation of the American Muslim community. Given these facts, it is clear that the true motive of these actions is not national security, but instead, the fulfillment of a discriminatory and unconstitutional pledge made on the campaign trail.
Engagement Resources
- Donate to Muslim Advocates – Muslim Advocates is a national legal advocacy and education organization dedicated to combating Muslim hate, empowering American Muslim communities and fighting discrimination against Muslims through legal action.
- Find a Congressional Town Hall Meeting Near You – Search by town and state or zip code to find a congressional Town Hall scheduled near you. Voice your concerns about the Travel Ban and other Trump Administration policies directly to your Representative or Senator.
- Volunteer or donate to Amnesty International – Amnesty International is a new non-governmental organization focused on human rights. They have been on the tirelessly fighting the travel ban and advocating for refugees through both grassroots and legal action.
This brief was compiled by William Lucier. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief please contact william@usresistnews.org.
Trump’s Second Trip Abroad: Poland, Germany, and France
Travel Dates: July 5 to July 15, 2017
Summary
On June 5th, President Trump embarked on his second trip to Europe as President. He visited Warsaw, Poland on the first day to give a speech as well as speak to leaders from Poland and the Baltics. Following his stop in Poland, President Trump traveled to Hamburg, Germany for the G20 Meeting. He attended meetings and summits, and he met personally with many delegations, including a private (and lengthy) conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin. After some days back home, President Trump traveled to Paris for Bastille Day.
Analysis
President Trump started off on the wrong foot with his expedition in Warsaw. He was greeted by huge crowds, which were a crucial part of the travel negotiations, and gave a speech about America’s views towards Europe. This speech was confusing and diverged from many ideas President Trump had established previously. His tendencies towards populism and right-wing nationalism were embraced by a like-minded government, and contained worrying language about the role of the United States in Eastern Europe.
The trip got worse as President Trump then flew to Hamburg, Germany, where he attended the G20 meeting. Much like the G7 summit earlier this year, Trump embarrassed the United States on one of the largest geopolitical stages. The United States was the only nation that refused to sign a communique about the dangers of climate change. President Trump’s stance, which is staunchly anti-environment, drew criticism as other major powers took the leadership role on global warming. The President also had a lengthy meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Among other things, the two leaders discussed the Russian hacking of the 2016 Presidential election, yet both parties left with different and muddled statements on the conversation. His little gaffes also dominated the news media, such as his “apolitical” daughter Ivanka Trump sitting in for him during the G20 meeting.
And in Paris, President Trump was treated to his favorite thing: large crowds. While this addition to the trip was largely uneventful, the President made a mysterious claim about a possible reversal on the Paris Climate Agreement. Although he may change his views for the better in this instance, this trend of “persuasion by flattery” is worrisome to the credibility and veracity of any future policy position.
This trip is yet another example of the United States ceding credibility and leadership throughout the globe. Shortly after meeting with President Trump, German Chancellor Angela Merkel told the world that America is no longer a reliable partner. Despite his best efforts to convince President Trump, even French President Emmanuel Macron said that the United States must be left behind. These statements are atypical descriptions of American leaders, regardless of party, and they should worry everyone. Not only is this dangerous for national security, but a decreased presence among leading countries will only give up American power and influence. With this trip, President Trump proved once again that his ignorance of global affairs harms our nation’s prestige, and more importantly, its citizens.
Student Protections from For-Profit Universities Postponed
Rollback of Guidances
Announced on Jule 14, 2017
Policy Summary
Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has postponed the implementation of two Obama era guidances aimed at protecting students from predatory for-profit colleges. The rules that were set to go into effect on July 1, called the “borrower defense to repayment” and “gainful employment” regulations, are stricter versions of protections that were passed in the 90’s meant to address fraud in the higher education system. If they were to be allowed to continue, the rules were aimed at expediting and growing the system for erasing the federal loan debt of students who were impacted by fraudulent colleges. Furthermore, if it was found that the graduates of these colleges did not earn enough money to pay off their student debt, the rules state that the loans to these schools would be cut off. According to DeVos, instead of immediately implementing the guidances, committees will be created to evaluate and improve upon the rules that she said “—missed an opportunity to get it right.” LEARN MORE
Analysis
Meant to protect students like Neisha Wright, 40, who accumulated $25,000 in loan debt obtaining what she calls “useless credits” courtesy of the allegedly fraudulent and now defunct ITT Tech, these rules gave hope for the victims of other predatory universities that at the very least the debt could be forgiven and some justice could be achieved. Now in the midst of a lawsuit against DeVos for rolling back the protections, Wright, has described DeVos’ decision to postpone these regulations as “devastating.” Maura Healey, a Massachusetts attorney general and leader of an 18 state coalition who just days before Wright also filed a lawsuit against DeVos and her department, sees the rollback as a “betrayal” of the students and their families. The lawsuit argues that the department did not have the authority to simply remove the regulations that had already gone through the lawmaking process. LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
- Americans for Financial Reform – A nonpartisan and nonprofit coalition of more than 200 civil rights, consumer, labor, business, investor, faith-based, and civic and community groups, AFR sets out to lay the foundation for a strong, stable, and ethical financial system
- Contact your state legislators – Call your representatives and let them know that protections for students are important to you!
- Student Loan Borrower Assistance Project – A project of the National Consumer Law Center, the SLBAP is a resource for borrowers, their families, and advocates representing student loan borrowers.
This brief was compiled by Cindy Stansbury. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief please contact, cindy@usresistnews.org.
15 States Join Hawaii’s Challenge to Travel Ban Enforcement
Motion to Appeals Court
Issued on July 10, 2017
Policy Summary
On July 10th the state of Hawaii motioned for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to broaden the exemptions that the Supreme Court granted, while it’s deliberating on the fate of the travel ban. Hawaii’s bid is bolstered by endorsements from 15 other left-leaning states including California and New York. Hawaii wants the Supreme Court’s exemption to be expanded to all family members, arguing that failure to do so would cause undue emotional and physical hardship on American citizens.
Analysis
The success of this motion hinges on the definition of what a bona fide relationship is. As when the Supreme Court decided to rule on the Travel Ban, it exempted those with a “bona fide relationship” with a U.S Citizen or National while it deliberates. The Trump administration then proceeded to define a bona fide relationship as parents, parents-in-law, spouses, fiancés, children, and children-in-law, thus exempting them from the ban. Consequently, grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, nieces, nephews and siblings-in-law, would be subjected to the ban. In other words, Hawaii is arguing that arbitrarily exempting some familial relationships, while still enforcing others was not the intent of the Supreme Court, and thus should be corrected by a lower court.
Engagement Resources
- Local Options for Protecting Immigrants – This document hosted by the National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights notes what steps local governments can take to protect immigrants against federal government actions.
- Find a Congressional Town Hall Meeting Near You – Search by town and state or zip code to find a congressional Town Hall scheduled near you. Voice your concerns about the Travel Ban and other Trump Administration policies directly to your Representative or Senator.
- Immigration Volunteer Search – Search for immigration volunteer opportunities near you, and do your part to help those under siege from Trump’s policies.
This brief was compiled by William Lucier. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief please contact william@usresistnews.org.
Budget Lessons from Kansas
Repealed Legislation
Passed June 7, 2017
Policy Summary
Earlier this June, the Kansas state legislature voted to pass Senate Bill 30, a bill that would override many of the large tax cuts that were championed by Governor Brownback. Governor Brownback attempted to veto the passage of S.B. 30, but was overridden by the legislature in a surprising move by the State senators in his party. The Brownback administration led a series of tax cuts beginning in 2012—but these cuts led to a decline in state revenues so stark that the state budget was facing a $900 million deficit. The new taxes introduced by S.B. 30 will raise $1.2 billion, revenue that the state plans to use towards bolstering K-12 education.
Analysis
Kansas’ Senate Bill 30 has been held up as an example for conservative lawmakers across the country—state conservatives were not afraid to reverse their previous anti-tax policies once they realized how much the tax cuts were hurting the state. The 2012 Kansas tax cuts led to a state budget crisis that led Kansas to cut services and was thought to be responsible for the state’s declining job and economic growth. As a result, the state’s bond credit rating was also downgraded—compromising the state’s ability to borrow funds and further complicating the state’s fiscal standing. The tax cuts also likely increased tax avoidance in the state, further exacerbating Kansas’ budget shortfall.
Kansas’ 2012 tax cuts—now repealed by SB 30—have been described as “Exhibit A” in how not to pass tax legislation. Unfortunately, Kansas’ model was used as a blueprint for the GOP’s national tax plan—a plan that may soon be passed as part of the efforts to “repeal and replace” the Affordable Care Act. The House bill included tax cuts of roughly $765 billion over the next decade. The decrease in revenue would be made up by making drastic cuts to Medicaid and Medicare (read more U.S. RESIST NEWS coverage about Health Care).
The Tax Policy Center, a non-partisan, non-profit think tank, found in an analysis that proposed Republican tax cuts would reduce economic growth and add $3.7 trillion to the country’s debt in the next year. Economists fear that a national bill would result in an even worse version of Kansas’ budget woes—and lead to dire consequences for the economy as well (read more here and here about the effect of these tax plans on jobs).
In the Senate, political pressures—including from moderate Republicans—led analysts to believe that the Senate bill would have fewer tax cuts. But the Senate bill, finally publicized late in June, includes nearly as much in tax cuts as the House bill. Voting on the bill has been delayed, but only time will tell what the ultimate health care bill looks like—and how deep its cuts will be.
Engagement Resources
- Call your Senators to voice your thoughts and feelings about the health care bill and its potentially dangerous tax cuts.
- Check the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities for research and briefs about proposed tax policy in the United States.
- Use the resources at org to see what your state legislatures’ recent actions on state budgets—especially their recent coverage of state budget conflicts.
Foreign Policy Flip-Flop: NATO Policy
This is the second in a series of U.S. RESIST NEWS Briefs that chronicle the flip-flop nature of many of the Trump administration’s foreign policies.
NATO Commitments
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO, was founded in 1949 as a response to rising global threats. NATO is the paramount international defense alliance, and its members are some of the beacons of stability and democracy across the globe. Because of President Trump’s malleable position, the United States —NATO’s largest contributor and the cornerstone of the alliance— regularly has its priorities questioned and its commitment scrutinized.
FLIP
On the campaign trail, President Trump regularly criticized NATO, claiming the United States should reconsider its involvement and famously remarking that NATO may be obsolete. He refused to commit to Article V, NATO’s concept of mutual defense, and this lack of assurance may be the most dangerous aspect of his rhetoric. President Trump’s obsession with NATO members paying their fair share continued after his election, and he reaffirmed his comments about the obsolete nature of the alliance.
FLOP
In April of 2017, President Trump defended himself, clarifying that he didn’t know very much about NATO and emphasizing that it was obsolete. Right before his first foreign trip, he stated how confident he was that NATO members would help — even though the only time Article V was ever invoked was immediately following 9/11. Yet when the President finally made his address to NATO, he refused to recommit to mutual defense (to the surprise of his international delegation) and instead focused on the 2% defense spending benchmark.
Our national security is threatened by the President’s muddled stance towards our most important coalition. Secretary of State Tillerson seems resolute in his support for the NATO alliance, and he expressed that “of course” the United States does support Article V. United States Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley also restated this commitment, and even claimed that the United States has never faltered on its responsibilities to the alliance. Whatever the case, the Trump administration must bolster our most important military and political alliance for the sake of our country and the entire democratic world.
Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Religious Pre-school
Supreme Court Ruling
Announced on June 26, 2017
Policy Summary
On the grounds of free exercise of religion, the Supreme ruled in favor of a Missouri church this week who had been denied state funding to refurbish their playground surface. The case Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer, arose after the state of Missouri would not allow state funds to be given to the church’s preschool to resurface the playground with tire chips, citing the state Constitution’s Blaine Amendments. These amendments forbid the state from financially supporting “any church, sector or denomination of religion.” In a 7 to 2 ruling, it was decided by the justices that the original decision violated the federal constitution because it “expressly discriminates against otherwise eligible recipients by disqualifying them from a public benefit solely because of their religious character.”LEARN MORE
Analysis
Though this case appears to be purely about a playground, to many it has much broader implications. School choice advocates have already heralded the ruling as a victory as they believe that it opens the door for state funding in the form of education vouchers to be used at any school, including religious ones. However on the opposite end, many see the ruling as a potential threat to the rights guaranteed by the separation of church and state. Daniel Mach, director of the ACLU, expressed disappointment in the decision, stating that “religious freedom should protect unwilling taxpayers from funding church property, not force them to foot the bill.” However, Mach also acknowledged that the ruling is specific to playground resurfacing grants, thus not giving the government “unlimited authority to fund religious activity.” Still, Justices Ruth Bader Ginsberg and Sonia Sotomayor see the long-term implications of the decision, calling it a “radical mistake.” LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
- American Civil Liberties Union– Fight for the separation of church and state and the right to say no to your federal dollars being sent to religious institutions with the ACLU, an organization fighting to protect civil liberties for almost 100 years.
- Learn more about vouchers with the National Coalition for Public Education. The NCPE has declared that if action is taken to implement a voucher program, they will not be silent. The group’s mission is to defend the public school system.
- Click here to learn how to contact your state legislators! Speak to them about your feelings in regards to voucher programs.
This brief was compiled by Cindy Stansbury. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief please contact, cindy@usresistnews.org.
Cities, Companies, Universities Bypass Trump on Climate
Private and Public Actions
Policy Summary
After President Trump withdrew the US from the Paris Climate Accord on June 1st, private and public actors have both vowed to lead the country’s fight against climate change. The coalition “We Are Still In” released a statement on June 5th declaring their intent to “ensure the U.S. remains a global leader in reducing carbon emissions.” The signatories are an amalgamation of cities, states, businesses, and universities representing over a third of the US population, accounting for $7.6 trillion of the US economy, and including over 20 Fortune 500 companies, such as Apple, Google, and Nike. 13 states have formed the US Climate Alliance in an effort to reduce national emissions, while 340 mayors have adopted Paris Accord goals for their cities. Additionally, Michael Bloomberg, the former New York City mayor and billionaire, has pledged to meet the $15 million funding gap left by the US for UN operations under the Paris Accord.
Analysis
While the public and private backlash to Trump’s decision induces environmental optimism, coalitions, cities, and businesses face major hurdles without federal support. Due to their limited size, city climate initiatives neglect some of the most emissions-intensive activities, such as agriculture, cement production, natural resource extraction, air travel, and power production, which often occur outside city limits. Moreover, “city policies would be rendered ineffective if sources of emissions relocate to evade them.” Burdensome restrictions in certain cities and states may cause companies to move their production to less stringent locations. The national coalitions and agreements may also face compliance issues; some signatories may not have the resources to be effective or may have signed on purely for publicity purposes. And while some actors, such as Nike and New York City, have released specific goals to reduce emissions and commit to renewable energy, others have no detailed plans to work with. Obviously, the commitment from companies, cities, and states to fight for the health of our planet is a positive sign with the potential to reduce emissions and to encourage environmentally conscious technologies and behaviors; but without a federal commitment to fight climate change, it will be difficult for these coalitions to save the world.
Engagement Resources
- Encourage your representatives to commit to the goals of the Paris Climate Accord
- Contact Your State Governor
- Contact Your Mayor – locate mayors by name, city, or population size.
- We Are Still In – explore the coalition of US government and business leaders who have declared support for climate action to meet the Paris Accord; encourage your affiliates to join.
This brief was compiled by Conor Downey. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief, please contact conor@usresistnews.org
