JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
Companies Distance Themselves From National Rifle Association (NRA) In Wake of Shooting at Parkland Florida High School
On February 14, 2018, seventeen students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida were killed when a shooter opened fire at the school. In the aftermath of the tragedy, a debate on gun control in the United States emerged with arguments for more gun control and restrictions and arguments…
Trump Administration Sues California Over Sanctuary Policies
On Tuesday, March 6, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that the Trump administration is suing the State of California, its Governor Jerry Brown (D), and its Attorney General Xavier Becerra (D), over three recently passed pieces of legislation, referred to as “sanctuary laws,” that have “made it impossible for federal immigration…
Trump’s White House Opioid Summit: Indication of Continued Inaction
Since Trump declared the opioid crisis a public health emergency in October of 2017, there has been very little successful action on preventative measures and combatting the effects of the crisis. The medication assistance “waiver” program suggested by HHS Secretary Alzar has only been filed by five different governors. This is due…
EPA Announces Remedy for West Lake Landfill Superfund Site
EPA Secretary Pruitt announced a proposed remedy for the West Lake Landfill in North Saint Louis County calling the site a top priority for the EPA. The project, named “Excavation Plus,” will remove most of the radioactive material that poses a public health threat and place a permanent cap and engineered cover system for long-term…
Department of Education Releases Notice to States: Stop Regulating Student Loan Servicers
On Friday, March 9, the U.S. Department of Education released a notice to stop states from regulating federal student loan servicers. The notice states, “Recently, several States have enacted regulatory regimes or applied existing State consumer protection statutes that undermine these goals by imposing new regulatory requirements…
Alzar’s Proposed ACA Change Increases “Junk Insurance” and Insurance Premiums for Nation’s Sickest
On Tuesday, February 20th, Secretary of Health and Human services, Alex Alzar announced a proposed rule to offer more “short term, limited duration health insurance.” This proposed rule would shorten the maximum time period of all Affordable Care Act (ACA) health care insurance plans from 12 to 3 months. This would…
Trump Institutes New Sanctions Against North Korea
On February 23rd, in the final minutes of an 80-minute speech, President Trump offhandedly mentioned a new set of sanctions against North Korea. What Trump called the “heaviest sanctions ever imposed on a country before” targeted 27 entities and 28 vessels in North Korea, China, and Singapore accused of helping the North…
Increase in Racial Harassment Complaints to the Department of Education
The civil rights division of the US Department of Education has seen a substantial increase in the number of racial harassment complaints they’ve received during 2017. Over the last nine years the Department’s civil rights division has never seen more than 600 racial harassment complaints in a year, until 2017 when 675 were filed. This is….
Trump Threatens to Pull ICE Officers Out of California
On Thursday, February 22, the Washington Post reported that a very frustrated Trump threatened to pull Immigration Customs and Enforcement (ICE) officials from the state of California as punishment for the “lousy job” the state has been doing to crackdown on illegal immigration per administration standards. Last December…
Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements
Executive Order
Issued on January 25, 2017
Summary
The stated purpose of this executive order is to thwart threats to national security and public safety that emerge from the United States’ southern border. This is done by invoking existing laws such as the Secure Fence Act and the Immigration and Nationality Act and aiming to redouble efforts to execute them. Most significantly, the order promises the immediate construction of a physical border wall on the Southern border, though there is no reference to the source of financing. The order also promises expedited determinations of claims of eligibility to remain in the United States and more prompt deportations, though without laying out how this more robust enforcement would take place. LEARN MORE
Analysis
The public safety/national security premise of President Trump’s executive order rings false, given that immigrants have been found to have a below average crime rate. While the United States has immigration laws on the books that ought to be enforced, the current trend of Mexican immigration is away from the United States and back to Mexico, and the history of enforcement of this border shows that with more barriers to entry, successful undocumented immigrants are more likely to remain. The other main issue with this order is that it does not provide a plan to fund the border wall. Republican leaders estimate that a wall would cost $12 to 15 billion dollars, funds that President Trump cannot raise without the assistance of Congress. Though Trump has repeatedly said otherwise, it does not appear as though Mexico will pay for the wall. LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
- Town Hall Project – This project compiles the open-to-the-public events held by state and local representatives. This provides a great opportunity to tell them that a border wall is not a prudent use of taxpayer money. You can also dial 1-844-6-RESIST to be redirected to the office of your local member of Congress.
- #Not1More – This non-profit organization aims to fight deportations through organizing, art, legislation, and action. Their website hosts a number of petitions to sign on individual deportation cases and many other resistance resources.
- 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.
American Health Care Act
Proposed Bill
Proposed on March 6, 2017
Summary
The draft of the Republican alternative to the Affordable Care Act (ACA) removes the individual mandate put in place to keep costs low in the insurance marketplace. Instead, the bill allows insurance companies to charge for a lapse in coverage. The bill also retains federal tax credits to help people afford insurance, but calculates credits based on age, not income. Some provisions of the ACA that remain are ensuring coverage for people with preexisting conditions and allowing young adults to remain on their parents’ insurance. Medicaid expansion would exist until 2020 and would then shift to a “per capita allotment” program. LEARN MORE
Analysis
The American Medical Association expressed their opposition, citing concerns of millions losing their insurance, that the rollback of Medicaid would harm states and low-income patients, and that tax credits corresponding to age, instead of income, would be insufficient for helping people afford insurance. Four Republican senators, whose states expanded Medicaid under ACA, have said they would not support the bill in its current state. Nancy Pelosi warned: “[t]he way they wrote the bill, the richest in America will get a big tax break and it will come at the expense of benefits being deprived of middle and low-income families.” LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
- People Power – Register for Resistance Training being offered by the ACLU on March 11, 2017.
- 5 Calls – Sign up for 5 Calls and they will provide you with the phone number for the most appropriate lawmaker in your area and scripts regarding different health care concerns to make sure your voice is heard by your representatives.
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.
Minimizing the Economic Burden of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Pending Repeal
Executive Order
Issued on January 20, 2017
Summary
President Trump signed an executive order meant to relieve financial and regulatory burdens placed on states, healthcare providers, companies, and individuals by the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in preparation for its repeal. All relevant agencies, by the President’s order, are to “waive, defer, grant exemptions from, or delay” measures of the ACA that would create such hardships. The executive order authorizes agencies to use their discretion when determining which aspects of the ACA they will deter, but it emphasizes that they act to the full extent of their authority. Trump’s order also encourages the creation of an interstate insurance marketplace. LEARN MORE
Analysis
This executive order allows sections of the ACA to be dismantled by giving power to federal agencies and states to define what is a “hardship” when deferring or waiving ACA directives. As Josh Blackman Josh Blackman noted, key provisions such as the individual mandate and essential minimum coverage can be suspended if determined to be burdensome. There is concern over how broad exceptions for items could impact the marketplace. Larry Levitt of the Kaiser Family Foundation claimed: “Potentially the biggest effect of this order could be widespread waivers from the individual mandate, which would likely create chaos in the individual insurance market.” LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
- Families USA – Non-profit organization that advocates for accessible, affordable, and comprehensive care working to stop the repeal of the ACA.
- Coalition to Protect America’s Health Care – An organization fighting to defend access to hospitals from federal cuts to patient care.
- Save Obamacare – Obamacare Fact’s resource page for information on how to support the ACA in 2017.
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.
Trans-Pacific Partnership
Presidential Memorandum
Issued on January 23rd, 2017
Summary
On January 23rd, 2017, President Trump signed an executive order withdrawing the United States from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) in order to institute his “America First Trade Policy” and enforce a “bilateral basis in negotiating future trade deals.” TPP was an agreement made by the Obama Administration which created a trade zone of twelve countries that border the Pacific Ocean, including Japan, Mexico, Canada, and Australia (including others). The agreement essentially forms stronger ties between the nations involved —slashing tariffs, encouraging trade, and enforcing trade rules— and would slowly implement these new terms over the next 15 years. LEARN MORE
Analysis
TPP could be one of the most important international economic agreements in history. The key is in the long term: TPP sets up a large trading zone and the United States would be the leader. GDP, real income, and exports are expected to rise over time. These types of trading zones will happen inevitably —and the United States could miss out on a big opportunity. Not only this, but TPP would allow the United States to impose regulations and rules, from environmental standards to worker’s rights, and this benefits every country in the deal. Not only are bilateral deals less effective, but something like the TPP will emerge and the U.S. will be left in the dust. LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
- Fairtrade Foundation — An international advocacy group which works to secure fair prices and workers’ rights for farmers.
- Fair Wage Network — An NGO which fights for fair minimum wage laws across and within nations in order to protect workers regardless of gender, class, or race.
- Business Council for Global Development — An organization which helps connect businesses in developing nations to their governments in order to advocate for economic, social, and environmental issues as well as success within the business.
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.
Medicaid in the American Health Care Act
Proposed Legislation
Replacement Bill released March 6, 2017
Summary
The proposed American Health Care Act (AHCA) that Republicans released on Monday would restructure Medicaid spending at the Federal and State levels by capping federal funding to the states. Each state would have to come up with any necessary funds beyond this fixed amount. The proposed bill freezes the expansion of Medicaid from the Affordable Care Act effective January 1st of 2020. This proposed freeze caused some discrepancies among Republican Senators as at least 4 Republican Senators say they will not vote for a bill that fails to protect Americans who became eligible for coverage under the ACA’s expansion of Medicaid. On Thursday, March 9th the bill passed the House Ways and Means Committee, a permanent committee of the House that recommends bills that will raise government revenue. LEARN MORE
Analysis
Obamacare expanded Medicaid to over 11 million people in 31 states as it broadened the coverage standards. The new bill’s freezing of this expansion may mean millions will now go uninsured. In 2010 Arizona froze enrollment in KidsCare, the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) under Medicare. This freeze led to savings of $12.9 million in FY 2011, but it has also resulted in over 100,000 children being placed on a waiting list for coverage. The AHCA’s freeze will likely do the same; save the government money but cover less people. Other concerns regarding the bill are the AHCA’s ability to effectively respond to unforeseen circumstances such as recessions, disease outbreaks, or the release of a new, expensive drug. In these situations, without additional funding, states would have to ration coverage. LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
- American Medical Association – AMA is strongly opposing the ACA replacement bill. On their website, you can learn about efforts to stop health insurance merger, see their vision for health care reform, and read articles about their AHCA opposition and why.
- National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare – This independent group fights to boost social security, prevent cuts to Medicaid and Medicare, and protect the working class. The website offers ways to show support, become an advocate, and join their forces.
- American Public Health Association – The APHA supports public health in many areas, including policy and advocacy. The website also provides a fact sheet about why we still need the ACA. On the website you can donate, become a member, and sign up for their newsletter.
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.
School Choice
Proposed Policy
Announced on September 8, 2016
Summary
By combining $20 billion in federal funds with $110 billion from the states, President Trump plans to install a nationwide school voucher program that would provide students living in poverty with $12,000 to put towards a school of their choice. School options would include public, private, charter, magnet, religious or home schooling. Trump has said the funding would come through cuts to the existing education department budget, leaving many almost certain that this would mean dismantling the current $14 billion federal Title 1 program which sends additional funds to districts serving at-risk students. LEARN MORE
Analysis
Not only is there the fear that the voucher program would eat away at the separation of church and state, utilizing taxpayer dollars to pay for students’ education at religious institutions, it would bleed the existing public schools of their dollars, sending children to unregulated for-profit institutions. Research shows that voucher programs do not necessarily improve academic achievement. In three studies, students from Ohio, Louisiana, and Indiana who utilize vouchers to attend private schools saw a significant loss in academic achievement. If “school choice” is to be pursued, some say the less “private” the institution the better. LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
- Contact Your Elected Officials – Policies such as the voucher program cannot pass without legislative support!
- 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.
- Network for Public Education – Become a supporter of the Network for Public Education to receive their plethora of reports, newsletters and action alerts regarding the importance of public education.
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.
Proposed State Laws That Threaten to Criminalize Protests and Demonstrations
Proposed Legislation from various states
Proposed in January/February 2017
Summary
Ever since the inauguration of President Donald J. Trump numerous states have introduced bills that have the potential to curb mass protests and demonstrations. The bills aim to toughen the penalties that protesters and demonstrators face when engaging in a protest event. The criminal penalties from the states range from increased fines and lengthier jail terms if convicted. Oregon is also debating mandatory expulsion from colleges and universities for a student convicted of participating in a violent riot while Arizona is considering police seizure of a person’s assets for participation in a violent protest. LEARN MORE
Analysis
Lee Rowland of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in a Washington Post article says the intent of these new legislative proposals is to “increase the penalties for protest – related activities to the point that it results in self – censorship among protesters who have every intention to obey the law.” Protesters now will have to think twice about whether they should head out and join in a march or demonstration event. The consequences of being barred from higher education, of financial loss and extended time in prison will cause fewer people to speak out and suppress discussion on important issues. LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
- Bill of Rights & Dissent Defense Committee – A nonprofit organization protecting the right of political expression.
- American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) – Repression of Peaceful Protest – Information page on repression of peaceful protest.
- First Amendment Center at the Newseum Institute – An institute focused on First Amendment issues.
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.
TPP Withdrawal
Deal Withdrawal
Withdrew in January 2017
Policy Summary
Throughout Obama’s presidency, he continued to try to get the Trans-Pacific Partnership passed through Congress. As a result of this bill, a free trade deal would be signed by 12 other nations (Canada, Mexico, Australia, Chile, Japan, Vietnam, Peru, etc.) The goal of this bill would be to reduce tariffs for American imports and exports traded with these countries. it would allow for goods to not only move more freely but also cheaply throughout the participating nations. Sadly, Obama was not able to pass it because of a multitude of reasons. Instead of picking up where Obama left off, Trump has completely decided to turn the negotiations on themselves by deciding to withdraw from the TPP. Trump continued to speak about his disapproval of the deal, even calling it a “continuing rape of our country”. The president believes that the TPP hurts American workers and undercuts American companies by giving a very clear advantage to other countries (not placing America first)
Analysis
A plethora of studies have shown that the belief that Trump has about this deal is completely unfounded. According to this report by CNBC “Reducing trade barriers will address the trade slowdown, and approving agreements such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership builds momentum for open trade and investment.” In addition, TPP would have accounted for almost a third of global trade and around 40% of the global gross domestic product. Furthermore, the TPP would have generated global income benefits by 223 billion within a year. A majority of Trump’s complaints about this bill is not putting “America first” even though it is very clear that the globe will benefit from TPP. Although, TPP would have assisted the global community it would also have helped the American economy. A report released by the ITC found that the TPP would have increased the U.S. real income by $57.3 billion, U.S. GDP by $42.7 billion, and created 128,000 jobs. Not only would TPP have strengthened the international community, but it also would have immensely helped the domestic economy by increasing GDP, jobs, and real income in the United States.
Engagement Resources
- Town Hall Project – This project compiles the open-to-the-public events held by state and local representatives. This provides a great opportunity to tell them that this executive order will do more bad than good. You can also dial 1-844-6-RESIST to be redirected to the office of your local member of Congress.
- US Senate – Contact your local representatives to take a stance against this proposed legislation. – https://www.senate.gov/senators/contact/
- US House of Representatives – Contact your local representatives to take a stance against this proposed legislation – http://www.house.gov/representatives/
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.
Federal Hiring Freeze
Executive Order
Issued on January 23, 2017
Summary
President Trump’s issued an executive order that installed a 90-day halt on the hiring of federal employees. The executive order ensured that no vacant positions could be filled and banned the creation of new positions, with some exemptions on any military personnel or any positions that may affect the national security of the United States. The goal, as stated in the executive order text, is to decrease the size of the national government. This hiring freeze is applicable to all executive departments and agencies regardless of where their funding comes from (except military personnel). LEARN MORE
Analysis
David Cox, American Federation of Government Employees President, claimed “President Trump’s action will disrupt government programs and services that benefit everyone and actually increase taxpayer costs by forcing agencies to hire more expensive contractors to do work that civilian government employees are already doing for far less,”. As a result, the freeze will allow for fewer workplace safety inspections, less oversight on the environment, and a greater risk to our food and water supplies. The President of the National Treasury Employees Union, Tony Reardon, concurred by claiming that a hiring freeze increases backlogs and decreases overall service quality. LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
- Federation of Government Employees – The largest federal employee union that offers legal representation, legislative advocacy and other services.
- National Treasury Employees Union – The nation’s largest independent union of federal employees, representing 150000 workers in 31 departments and agencies.
- National Federation of Federal Employees – It represents Federal employees across the nation, District of Columbia and overseas.
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.
Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States
Executive Order
Issued on January 25, 2017
Summary
This executive order states that its primary goal is to more faithfully execute immigration laws to ensure public safety, and it provides three major changes to current policy to do so. Firstly, the order vastly expands the group of undocumented immigrants prioritized for deportation from the previous standard of presenting a threat to public safety and national security to any immigrant who has been charged with a crime, received a public benefit, or not met their legal obligation to leave the country, among other large categories. Secondly, law enforcement officers are now expected to act as immigration officers, pursuing the detainment of any suspected undocumented immigrant. Lastly, the order includes a threat to cut off funding to localities that refuse to enforce federal immigration law (commonly referred to as sanctuary cities). LEARN MORE
Analysis
This bill threatens to remove, swiftly and with priority, millions of undocumented immigrants who have a positive impact on the American economy, and may be firmly rooted in their communities. Additionally, parts of this order are counterproductive for public safety and are potentially illegal. While President Trump prioritizes ‘law and order’ in his rhetoric, law enforcement officials have noted that they are afraid of the effect that this order will have on the ability to conduct domestic investigations, since needed witnesses and tipsters may be afraid to interact with law enforcement for fear of deportation. The Supreme Court has ruled that the federal government cannot compel state or local officials to enforce federal law or impose conditions on grants to states and local governments unless originally stated in the law so that States can choose whether or not to accept the funds. Thus, the part of the order pertaining to sanctuary cities would likely be thoroughly tested in court if enacted. LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
- Town Hall Project – This project compiles the open-to-the-public events held by state and local representatives. This provides a great opportunity to tell them that a border wall is not a prudent use of taxpayer money. You can also dial 1-844-6-RESIST to be redirected to the office of your local member of Congress.
- 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.
- Petition to End the Detention of Families and Asylum Seekers – Sign this petition, created in a joint effort by a number of major non-profit organizations.
- 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.