JOBS

JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES

The Jobs and Infrastructure domain tracks and reports on policies that deal with job creation and employment, unemployment insurance and job retraining, and policies that support investments in infrastructure. This domain tracks policies emanating from the White House, the US Congress, the US Department of Labor, the US Department of Transportation, and state policies that respond to policies at the Federal level. Our Principal Analyst is Vaibhav Kumar who can be reached at vaibhav@usresistnews.org.

Latest Jobs Posts

 

DHS Ends TPS for 9,000 Nepalis

Brief #52 Immigration April 24, 2018 Policy Summary On Tuesday, April 24, The Washington Post reported that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is once again ending Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for 9,000 Nepalis living in the United States legally under the...

read more

Third Federal Judge Upholds DACA

Brief #50 Immigration Policy Summary On Wednesday, April 25, Judge John D. Bates became the third federal judge to uphold the DACA program, dealing a blow to Trump’s hard-lined anti-immigration policies, calling the administration’s decision to terminate the program...

read more

US, UK, and France Attack Syrian Chemical Sites

Just before dawn on April 14th, The United States, United Kingdom, and France launched a joint missile attack against two Syrian chemical weapon storage facilities and one research center. The strike was described by the western governments as a retaliation for a chemical attack against a rebel held Damascus suburb, Douma, on April 7th.

read more

Trump Announces Quotas for Immigration Judges

On Monday, April 2, the Justice Department announced that it will be instating quotas for immigration judges to fill in order to process cases faster. Immigration judges will be expected to clear a minimum of 700 cases per year in order to keep their jobs.

read more
Jobs01 e1489352304814

Study of the Federal Role within the Education System

Executive Order
Issued on April 26, 2017

Policy Summary

In accordance with a new executive order, Betsy DeVos will be conducting a study into whether or not the federal government has “overstepped”  its oversight of K-12 schools. The order was framed by Donald Trump as a part of a broader move to bring power over the education system back to the states and local communities. DeVos has 300 days to conduct the review into the lawfulness of guidance and regulations surrounding the school system. The order does not give DeVos any more authority than she previously possessed. LEARN MORE

Analysis

As the Obama era Department of Ed. allocated a large amount of resources towards civil rights in schools, the push for a lesser federal role in education presented within this executive order leaves many fearing that protections for vulnerable students will unravel. Calling Trump’s order “dangerous and wrongheaded,” Wade Henderson, president and chief executive of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, stated that schooling without federal oversight has never worked for all children and will not work now. A number of people also find the order to be silly and pointless; a purely symbolic gesture for Trump to appear to have made accomplished things to finish out his first 100 days. LEARN MORE

Engagement Resources

  • Nation Education Association- The NEA with its 3 million members from every level of education, is committed to advancing the cause of public education. The NEA seeks to fulfill the promise of public education that prepares every student to succeed in a diverse and interdependent world
  • The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights – This is a coalition with a diverse membership of more than 200 national organizations aimed at promoting and protecting the civil and human rights of all persons in the United States.
  • ACLU – Learn more about the civil rights of students with the American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU offers an online guide detailing the ins and outs of the educational equality rights of children in our nation’s schools.

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.


 

Education01

Tax Reform

Proposed Legislation
Proposed on April 26, 2017

Policy Summary

The Trump Administration has issued a one-page plan to reform the tax system in America. The plan calls for the simplification of the tax code and the deepest cuts in tax rates paid by American families and businesses seen since the Reagan administration. More specifically, the plan calls for decreasing the number of tax brackets from seven to three (10%, 25%, and 35%). It calls for cutting the tax rate for all businesses to 15%. LEARN MORE

Analysis

By cutting taxes so drastically the Trump tax plan also reduces the amount of revenue the government is able to take in through taxation. To begin, it has called for doubling the standard deduction rate. The head of Trump’s National Economic Council, Gary Cohn, said, “We are going to double the standard deduction so a married couple wouldn’t pay any taxes on the first $24,000 income they earn.”  In addition, Trump’s plan calls for an elimination of the alternative minimum tax (ATM). This tax was put in place by Congress as a way to get wealthy people to pay taxes rather than use tax loopholes to avoid paying them. Furthermore, to aid the rich the Trump plan also calls for the removal of the estate tax – a tax on assets being transferred through a will (often used by the wealthy elites). All these proposed tax cuts, many studies have found, will add nearly 5.5 trillion dollars to the debt which could potentially lead to a slower economy due to stagnant wages.  It remains to be seen whether Trump can translate his one-page tax plan into meaningful legislation that Congress will pass.

Engagement Resources

  • Make Tax Fair –Their objective is to contribute to fair taxation. Support fair taxation, make a change.
  • US Senate – Contact your local representatives to take a stance against this proposed legislation.
  • US House of Representatives – Contact your local representatives to take a stance against this proposed legislation.

This brief was compiled by Vaibhav Kumar. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief please contact vaibhav@usresistnews.org.

Tariff on Canadian Lumber

Proposed Tariff
Proposed on April 25, 2017

Policy Summary

President Donald Trump announced on April 25th a new set of tariffs on Canadian lumber policies. Citing an unfair deal, President Trump has launched a new set of duties ranging from 3% to 24% on five Canadian lumber companies. Currently, most Canadian lumber firms pay a tariff of 20% on exports to the United States. This dispute over Canadian lumber is many decades old, and President Trump will not be the first to issue new tariffs. While this decision will not be finalized by the Commerce Department until September, they are effective immediately and 90 days retroactively. LEARN MORE

Analysis

Once again, President Trump did not consider all possible externalities with this new tariff. This duty would hurt American homebuilders and would raise the price for new homeowners across the country. Because the Canadian government owns many of the forests in Canada, they are able to offer better subsidies. Instead of negotiating, President Trump would rather start a trade war with our close ally and economic partner. This is dangerous for the United States politically, and a calmer and wiser approach may help the average American citizen more in the long run. LEARN MORE

Engagement Resources

This brief was compiled by Jacob Malinowski. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief please contact jacob@usresistnews.org.


 

Foreign01

Senate Bill 823 Against Warrantless and Random Searches of American Citizens Digital Devices At U.S. Border Crossings

Proposed Congressional Legislation
Proposed April 4, 2017

Policy Summary

On April 4, 2017, Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) introduced in the U.S. Congress the “Protecting Data At The Border Act.” The bill is aimed at protecting the privacy rights of Americans as they exit or re – enter the United States with regard to their personal electronic devices and the personal information contained on those devices. The bill, if passed, would [1] require a warrant based on probable cause for a border agent to search a device and [2] prohibit law enforcement officials from delaying or denying entry to the U.S. by persons who refuse to hand over to border law enforcement officials their device PIN numbers, passwords and social media account information. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE

Analysis

Senate Bill 823 is a needed new law because of the potential for abuse and the protections it promises to provide to American citizens. In 2016, Department of Homeland Security data showed nearly 25,000 incidents of cell phone searches by border agents. This was an increase from the 5,000 incidents in 2015. The Fourth Amendment provides against “unreasonable searches or seizures” and yet searches at the border constituted nothing more than agents thumbing through photos, text messages, and apps containing highly sensitive personal information, such as banking and health information. The search of digital devices of foreign nationals can still occur but Senator Wyden’s bill is properly narrow in that it implements protections for Americans and requires a more substantial connection to criminal activity to search. This will ensure that Americans are not subject to random searches of their digital devices when crossing a United States border. LEARN MORE, 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.


 

CivilRights01

House Joint Resolution 43 (H.J. Res 43) [Update]

115th Congress
Passed on March 30, 2017

Update: April 13, 2017

This is an update on Health Policy Brief 5 that reported that H.J. Res 43  was passed through Congress on March 30, 2017. On April 13, President Trump signed the bill into law, allowing states to discriminate against certain healthcare providers, such as Planned Parenthood.

Policy Summary

Congress voted to overturn a rule put in place by the Obama administration in December 2016 that prevented states from denying Title X Family Planning funding to health care providers who offer abortion services. Title X funds are intended to provide access to “family planning and related preventative health services for millions of low-income or uninsured individuals”.  H.J. Res 43 passed with a tie-breaking vote cast by Vice President Pence, disapproving of the rule that stated states could not withhold Title X sub-grants from otherwise eligible family planning health care providers, solely because they offer abortions, in addition to other health services. LEARN MORE

Analysis

Title X funding helps more than four million clients, according to their 2015 annual report. The Planned Parenthood Action Fund warns that this “could embolden states to discriminate against family planning health care providers — both Planned Parenthood health centers and independent clinics”. According to the Guttmacher Institute, “72% of U.S. counties had at least one safety-net family planning center supported by Title X, and 94% of women in need of publicly funded family planning care lived in those counties” in 2010. Researchers estimate that healthcare provided by Title X-funded providers prevented 326,000 abortions in 2014 that would have been caused by a higher unintended pregnancy rate.

Engagement Resources

  • Donate to Planned Parenthood – Planned Parenthood is asking for emergency contributions to help fight states who may try to defund the organization.
  • Call your Senator – Call your U.S. Senator on behalf of Planned Parenthood and tell them not to defund Planned Parenthood.
  • Become a fundraiser for Guttmacher Institute – create a page to share on social media to help raise funds to support Guttmacher Institute’s sexual and reproductive health policy work.

This brief was compiled by Elizabeth Kiefer. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief please contact elizabeth@usresistnews.org.


 

Health01

State-Level Responses to Federal Action on Sanctuary Jurisdictions

Proposed and Approved State Legislation
Ongoing

Summary

In response to President Trump’s January executive action to crack down on sanctuary jurisdictions, states have responded in two opposite ways – either cracking down on sanctuary cities under their jurisdiction or moving for the entire state to become a sanctuary jurisdiction. Sanctuary cities or states are defined as jurisdictions that limit their cooperation with the federal government in order to help undocumented immigrants avoid deportation. While the state of Tennessee already had a law that prevents cities from making policies that hinder the enforcement of federal immigration law, Republican lawmakers have proposed a new policy that would cut off funding to cities that did such. With the support of Governor Greg Abbott, the Texas legislature passed a similar bill in February. On the other hand, the California State Senate has passed a bill this week that would prohibit local law enforcement agencies from using resources to pursue immigration violations. Similar bills have been introduced in Illinois, Maryland, Nevada, and New York. Vermont already has a similar law on the books.

Analysis

Sanctuary states would challenge a federal government that is decidedly unwelcoming and eager to deny undocumented immigrants their day in immigration court by deporting them for committing a crime as minor as a traffic violation. The stance that sanctuary states would take is an admirable one, but forcing local law enforcement officials to choose whether to obey their state government or the federal government is not an optimal policy outcome and could present problems that municipal sanctuary policy would not. Sanctuary states also would pose a massive challenge to the Trump administration’s threat to cut off funding to sanctuary jurisdictions, which on the city level would already be a legally questionable move.

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.
  • Support a Local Solidarity Network in Your Area – Organizations are rapidly forming on a local level across the country to protect the rights of undocumented immigrants and to ensure that law enforcement agencies are acting legally and justly as they seek to enforce these new executive orders. Examples include the Washington Immigrant Solidarity Network and Mi Casa es Su Casa (San Diego).
  • Resistance Manual – Crisis Resources – If you know someone who is facing immigration troubles, please share this compendium of legal resources and relevant nonprofit organizations with them.

This brief was compiled by Oliver Bjornsson. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief please contact oliver@usresistnews.org.


 

Immigration01

Rescinded Protections for Student Loan Borrowers

Rescinded Guidances
Issued on April 11, 2017

Policy Summary

Secretary of Education Betsy Devos has rescinded guidances aimed at making it easier for borrowers to pay back their student loans, citing a financial responsibility to not only borrowers but taxpayers. The series of Obama Administration policy memos, instituted in the face of a wave of student loan defaults, strengthened consumer protections for borrowers by instructing loan servicers to follow certain guidelines aimed  at““simplifying the repayment process, better protecting borrowers, and facilitating our oversight of servicing contractors.” This decision to rescind the guidelines comes as the Department of Education is facing $9 billion in budget cuts. LEARN MORE

Analysis

Lawmakers and advocacy groups argue that since the government pays millions to the student loan servicers to manage about $1.2 trillion in loans, more regulations should be required of those contractors, not less.When left on their own, reports from the Government Accountability Office and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) show that loan servicers often do not look out for the best interest of their borrowers. Naivent, a well-known loan servicer has been sued by Washington State and the CFPB for allegedly cheating borrowers out of their repayment rights. It has been said that due to Devos’ action, it is likely that Navient will still receive a new contract. Former Deputy Treasury Secretary Sarah Bloom Raskin said that Devos’ decision, which does reverse policies that Raskin had worked on, made without a substitute or clear reason, shows that the administration is placing the welfare of loan servicers above those of student borrowers. LEARN MORE

Engagement Resources

  • Americans for Financial Reform – The AFR is a nonprofit organization made up of 200 civil rights, consumer, labor, business, investor, faith-based, and civic and community groups who are working to lay the foundation for a strong, stable, and ethical financial system.
  • 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.
  • Consumer Financial Protection Bureau – A U.S Government agency tasked with making sure that banks, lenders and others in the financial world, treat consumers fairly.

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 cindys@usresistnews.org.


 

Education01

Work Requirements for Medicaid

Proposed State Legislation
Ongoing

Policy Summary

After the failure of Trump’s American Health Care Act, some conservative Republicans are calling for work requirements for Medicaid Beneficiaries. The Kaiser Family Foundation update says least four states including Arizona, Indiana, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania have formally submitted waiver requests to require work as a condition for Medicaid eligibility. Each state’s proposal differs slightly but none have been approved. Florida, which is currently one of the toughest states to get Medicaid coverage, is eying new work requirements as well. Indiana, Montana, and New Hampshire offer voluntary work program referrals to adults covered by Medicaid, and some states are considering follow those models. LEARN MORE

Analysis

Supporters, like health and human services chairman Rep. Travis Cummings, argue that the requirements are “an effort to encourage people to work and take their health care more seriously” and that Medicaid is eating up too much of the budget. Others argue that requirements could increase program costs if individuals are denied coverage and then need emergency care. If the work requirements were implemented, monitoring and enforcing them would be difficult and costly. Overall, the impact of Medicaid work requirements is not expected to be very large as the majority of Medicaid recipients who are able to work already do. 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.


 

Entitlement01

Senate Vote Overturns Obama Administration Retirement Assistance

Approved Legislation
Passed on March 30, 2017

Policy Summary

In a 50-49 vote, the Senate has reversed rules from the Obama administration that made it easier for cities to provide government-run retirement plans to private sector workers. Many workers currently do not have retirement saving plans, but under the Obama administration, the government would assist private sector workers to save for retirement. This reversal under the Trump administration will lead to a fundamental decrease in the size of government as they will no longer be involved in assisting workers in their future retirement plans. LEARN MORE

Analysis

According to Reporter Fernando, “Nearly half of all private-sector workers between the ages of 18 and 64 — and a troubling proportion of small business employees — do not have access to retirement savings account through their employer.”. This explains why nearly 45% of Americans do not have any form of retirement savings. As a result, under the Obama administration, the federal government would assist in the making of retirement plans for private sector workers. Sadly, this has been overturned and now more than ever the federal government is needed to aid workers in saving for their future. This is especially true because consumer advocates have estimated that nearly 55 million employees will not have access to a workplace retirement plan as a result of this legislation. The federal government is a crucial medium through which individuals save for their future. Without it, the future of our workers remains in jeopardy.

Engagement Resources

  • AFL-CIO – The American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations is a national trade union center and the largest federation of unions in the United States.
  • Pensions’ Rights Center – The Pension Rights Center is the country’s only consumer organization dedicated solely to protecting and promoting the retirement security of American workers.
  • State Legislators – State Legislators have begun to take a stand against this bill. States like Oregon and California have opened up retirement plans for private sector workers.

This brief was compiled by Vaibhav Kumar. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief please contact vaibhav@usresistnews.org.


 

Jobs01

Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth

Executive Order
Issued on March 28, 2017

Policy Summary

President Trump’s March 28 Executive Order, entitled “Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth,” takes extensive action to eliminate federal climate policies and regulations, explicitly targeting at least 23 executive actions, federal rules, memoranda, and reports. Most notably, the directive moves to rescind the Clean Power Plan while undercutting key elements of climate policy analysis. Additionally, the EO orders agency heads to review and eliminate all regulations and policies that “burden the development or use of domestically produced energy resources, with particular attention to oil, natural gas, coal, and nuclear energy resources.” While some aspects of the directive will take effect immediately, others are likely to be held up by rulemaking procedures and legal battles.

Analysis

In an effort to “grow American jobs” Trump is taking broad steps to reverse the climate legacy of the Obama administration by deregulating “impediments to American energy independence.” His executive order starts by revoking four Obama-era executive actions which individually strengthen the resilience of American communities from the severe impacts of climate change, mitigate negative impacts to natural resources, establish a framework for considering climate-related impacts in the development of national security doctrine, and direct the EPA to set carbon pollution standards and regulations and rescinded two reports detailing Obama’s Clean Action Plan strategies for cutting carbon pollution, preparing for the impacts of climate change, and reducing methane emissions. Those who oppose the directive have emphasized the devastating implications for the environment and public health and have fought against the job contention, arguing that coal jobs are declining because of weakened demand, mechanization, and competition from oil and natural gas; that wind, solar, and energy efficiency jobs outnumber coal jobs 16 to 1; that the order would create investment uncertainty; and that accelerating efficiency would be better for energy independence.

Clean Power Plan

The executive order begins the arduous process of rescinding Obama’s signature Clean Power Plan, which aims to significantly cut emissions of greenhouse gasses and harmful pollutants from power plants while advancing the development and deployment of clean energy. The Rhodium Group estimates that Obama’s policies would help reduce US emissions 21% below 2005 levels by 2025, but Trump’s executive order will reverse the trend and stabilize greenhouse gas emissions. This shift will make it extremely difficult for the country to meet international climate commitments and will be interpreted globally as the US tacitly pulling out of the Paris Climate Agreement (the agreement, reached between 195 countries in 2016, aims “to stave off the most devastating effects of climate change by limiting the increase in global temperatures”). In order to reverse Obama’s plan, the EPA will have to justify the scientific and economic basis for their new, weaker plan and will likely face years of litigation and legal battles attempting to implement it.

Climate Policy Analysis

The executive order also radically changes how agencies will evaluate policy action by rescinding guidance which “provides agencies with a framework for agency consideration of the effects of [greenhouse gases] and climate change to ensure efficient and transparent agency decision-making” and getting rid of the social cost of carbon which allows agencies to incorporate the social benefits of greenhouse gas reductions by monetizing damages. The order directs agencies to revert to a 2003 Office of Management and Budget guidance which will likely reduce the estimated cost of climate damages by 90% or more. The social cost of carbon is the “most important climate measurement,” underlying nearly every environmental analysis and climate-related policy. By revoking these measures Trump removes the requirement to consider the climate impacts of potential policies and incapacitates federal agencies from effectively evaluating public health and climate change consequences.

Coal, Oil, Natural Gas

The executive order lifts a freeze on federal coal leasing which halts coal mine expansions on public land. The moratorium was meant to stay in place until the government could review the climate impacts and royalty fairness of the coal-leasing program. Trump touted the rescission as bringing jobs to coal miners, but it only affects “mines in Wyoming and Montana, where coal companies had for years shed jobs because of increased automation and declining coal demand.” The order also rescinds stricter design standards and regulations for hydraulic fracturing on federal and tribal lands and oil/gas operations within national parks and refuges; this rollback will hamper the government’s ability to safeguard against negative impacts such as man-made earthquakes and threats to groundwater. The president’s directive also targets restrictions on dangerous mountaintop removal mining and a rule reducing methane waste and flaring. Mountaintop removal is notorious for its appalling effects on the environment and on human health, including links to cancer and birth defects for nearby populations. The methane waste prevention rule (thoroughly analyzed here) is estimated to increase economic revenue, to make deep cuts to methane emissions, and to reduce a multiplicity of health-related risks.

Engagement Resources

  • Natural Resources Defense Council – an international environmental advocacy group committed to fighting Trump’s “environmental assault” and providing individuals with avenues for action.
  • Greenpeace USA – an environmental NGO that uses direct action, lobbying, research, and ecotage to raise public awareness and to influence the public and private sectors.
  • Sierra Club – the nation’s largest environmental preservation organization; focuses include mitigating global warming and opposing coal; suing the Trump administration over this EO.
  • World Resources Institute ­– a global NGO committed to protecting the Earth, improving people’s lives, and creating prosperity through sustainable natural resource management.

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.


 

Environment01

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