JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
The Week That Was: Global News in Review
In a week marked by escalating conflicts and public health crises, our global news review covers the Mpox outbreak, Ukraine’s bold military advances, Sudan’s relentless civil war, and the latest in U.S.-Panama migration policy. These unfolding stories highlight the urgent challenges shaping our world today.
Will Google’s Antitrust Battle Lead to Real Change?
A landmark U.S. court ruling has declared Google’s stranglehold on the search engine market illegal, calling into question the tech giant’s future. As this high-stakes antitrust battle unfolds, the outcome could radically redefine internet competition and reshape the digital world.
The Swing States Series: #3 Arizona
Arizona, once a reliable red state, is now at the heart of the nation’s most crucial political battlegrounds, where shifting demographics and deep-seated issues like immigration, gun ownership, and climate change are reshaping its identity. As both parties vie for control, the state’s diverse electorate holds the power to sway the 2024 presidential election in a profound way.
Artificial Meat and Global Food Security: A Sustainable Future?
As the world grapples with rising populations and climate change, artificial meat emerges as a groundbreaking solution to global food security challenges. By reducing environmental impact and offering a sustainable alternative to conventional meat, cultured meat could reshape the future of food.
The Rise of ‘Weird’ and the New Framing of Anti-Abortion Policies
Despite widespread public support for abortion rights, restrictive policies continue to rise, highlighting a stark disconnect between American voters and their government. As “weird” becomes the new political shorthand, Vice President Kamala Harris and Governor Tim Walz challenge the unsettling narratives driving anti-abortion legislation.
The Week That Was: Global News in Review
Brief #153 – Foreign Policy Brief
by: Ibrahim Castro
In this week’s global news review, we delve into the escalating protests in Venezuela, the violent far-right riots sweeping the UK, and the assassination of a Hamas leader that threatens to ignite further conflict in the Middle East. As governments topple and tensions rise, stay informed on the critical developments shaping our world.
Whose Republic Can Protect Democracy?
As the 2024 election approaches, the battle over the true meaning of American democracy intensifies, with Biden, Trump, and the Heritage Foundation each claiming to protect the Republic envisioned by the Founding Fathers. This high-stakes debate over civics and power could reshape the future of U.S. governance, as the electorate grapples with the competing visions for America’s political soul.
Putin and Trump’s Connections: Onstage and Behind the Scenes, Part 2: “I got along with Putin.”
Brief #152 – Foreign Policy Brief
by: Yelena Korshunov
Donald Trump’s close ties with Vladimir Putin, highlighted by his controversial praise and diplomatic approach, bring the spotlight back to the unsettling Putin and Trump connections. As Trump proposes a peace plan for Ukraine, these connections raise critical concerns about the future of U.S. foreign policy and global security.
Current Events in a Post-Roe V. Wade Era
Policy Brief #175 – Health and Gender
by: Geoffrey Small
In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, the United States is grappling with a rapidly shifting landscape of reproductive rights, marked by new policy proposals, legal battles, and state-level legislation. This article delves into the ongoing turmoil, highlighting key events and their profound impact on the future of abortion access in America.
Takeaways From the Presidential Immunity Decision
Takeaways From the Presidential Immunity Decision
Civil Rights Policy Brief #227 | By: Rodney A. Maggay | July 12, 2024
Featured Photo: chicagotribune.com
__________________________________
On July 1, 2024 the United States Supreme Court handed down the case Trump v. United States. The case was popularly known as the presidential immunity case. After Mr. Trump lost the 2020 presidential election to Joe Biden, he was indicted in four separate criminal cases. On August 1, 2023 a federal grand jury in Washington, D.C. indicted the former president for conspiring to overturn the 2020 election, obstructing the counting and certification of the electoral votes and spreading knowingly false claims of election fraud. Initially, federal district judge Tonya Chutkan rejected Trump’s claims of presidential immunity. An appeal was made to the United States Supreme Court and accepted. The Court heard oral arguments on April 25, 2023. In a highly anticipated decision, the Court handed down its decision on the last day of the 2024 term, a 6 – 3 ruling that approved of presidential immunity when the President is performing his official duties while also deciding that a president has no immunity for non – official duties. LEARN MORE
Analysis:
The presidential immunity case was expected to be a blockbuster case and when it finally was handed down it did not disappoint. The case was always going to be controversial. While there are notable points to highlight, a closer examination of the decision reveals a decision that did not clarify an important legal concept but instead may have muddied the issue of presidential immunity even more.
Chief Justice John Roberts’ majority opinion approached the issue by categorizing acts taken by a president into two categories – official acts and un – official acts. In a criminal prosecution case, the Court attempted to balance the competing interests of preventing intrusion into a functioning Executive Branch and the compelling public interest in a fair and effective enforcement of the laws over everybody, including a president. The Court reasoned that a president has presumptive immunity because a chief executive must have the space to carry out his constitutional duties without undue caution that he might be criminally prosecuted for his acts later. And after declaring this, the Court declared that a President does not have immunity for un – official acts. This framework is a logical extension of prior cases (e.g., the Nixon v. Fitzgerald case that held a president is also immune from civil suits) but the Court created confusion when it refused to issue a legal rule that would guide lower courts as to how to delineate between official acts and un – official acts.
The Supreme Court often issues legal rules to provide guidance to lower courts as to how to deal with common issues and fact patterns. Free speech cases have the three tiers of rules that courts use to analyze speech cases – strict scrutiny, intermediate scrutiny and the rational basis test. The Reasonable Expectation of Privacy test under the Fourth Amendment is used to determine if a search by law enforcement is reasonable and whether it must conform to the limitations of the Fourth Amendment. When the Court declared that it must be first determined whether a president’s acts were official or un – official, it should have also put forth rules for lower courts to use to determine that. It did not in this case. It simply stated that lower courts should make those fact based determinations themselves while stating that a future president is deemed presumptively immune first unless a prosecutor can prove that the president was performing a non – official act.
But this is where it gets tricky and complicated and provides a benefit to Donald Trump. If a president can merely declare he is acting officially, does that end the inquiry? That would seem to make any president judge and jury over his own actions and with no way to hold the person in the office accountable. Trump’s actions during the events of January 6th and in the days after could conceivably be seen as a president trying to perform the duties of the presidency in fighting election fraud, thus making Trump immune. But the facts of Trump’s election fraud “Big Lie” campaign clearly demonstrate that the former President was breaking the law and trying to obstruct Members of Congress from performing their constitutional duties in collecting and certifying electoral ballots.
Surely a president should not be immune from his acts in preventing the Constitution from being performed in the way it was designed. Not allowing the Constitution to proceed in the way it has been laid out or government officials to perform their own duties now makes, under the majority opinion, the president a “king above the law” with limited options to hold a president accountable. And for Donald Trump’s four criminal cases, it gives him an opening to claim that everything he did regarding the 2020 election was an official act when in reality there is good strong evidence that he was not acting in an official capacity or that he was acting in the best interests of the American people. He was trying to overturn a free and fair election that he lost. Presidential immunity should not mean one gets a free pass at ignoring the voice of the American people at the ballot box.
In a concurring opinion Justice Amy Coney Barrett actually provides a legal test that could be used to determine a president’s criminal liability for some acts taken in office. It is a two – step analysis that would see if there is a relevant federal criminal statute and if applying it would intrude on the functions of the Executive Branch. This would have been a completely acceptable legal rule yet the majority chose simply to ignore it. This is why the case is so frustrating – one Justice (and one considered a conservative vote on the bench) offered a way to hold a president accountable yet the majority decided to take steps to instead make it more difficult to hold a President accountable.
What’s next for Trump and his four criminal cases? Despite what some news sites have reported he cannot have the cases instantly dismissed. The decision says that courts now must hold hearings and determine which acts taken by Trump are official and which are non – official, a very tedious and likely lengthy prospect. Holding these hearings stretches the trial process out many months into the future what must be done before a trial can even be held. Maybe Trump might be found guilty in any one of his criminal cases but because additional hearings must be held first to determine and categorize which of his acts are official and which are not, Trump can strategically delay some if not all of his cases. And with possible appeals it is conceivable some of his cases won’t be resolved until the 2030’s. This is the immediate result of this presidential immunity case that didn’t have to be decided this way. LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
- SCOTUS Blog – background info and timeline of the case leading to the presidential immunity Supreme Court case.
- ABC News – article with predictions on how the ruling will impact Trump’s ongoing criminal cases.
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 rodwood@email.com.
Stay in-the-know with the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. We depend on support from readers like you to aide in protecting fearless independent journalism, so please consider donating to keep democracy alive today!
Guarding Young Minds: The Call for Social Media Warning Labels and Its Implications
Guarding Young Minds: The Call for Social Media Warning Labels and Its Implications
Education Policy Brief #93 | By: Inijah Quadri | July 12, 2024
Featured Photo: heroesinwaiting.org
__________________________________
In an era dominated by digital platforms, social media has become a central part of daily life, not just for adults but significantly for children and youth. Platforms like Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and Snapchat are not only sources of entertainment and connection but also of substantial mental health concern. On average, children ages 8-12 in the United States spend 4-6 hours a day on screens, while teens spend up to 9 hours a day using electronic devices, including smartphones, tablets, and computers. The U.S. Surgeon General, Vivek H. Murthy, has highlighted the urgent need for measures to protect younger users from the potential harms of social media use.
This concern is rooted in emerging research that suggests a correlation between extensive social media use and various mental health issues, including anxiety, depression, and decreased self-esteem among children and adolescents. These platforms, designed to maximize engagement, often promote content that can be harmful to the mental well-being of young users.
Analysis
The Surgeon General’s advocacy for warning labels on social media platforms is not merely a precaution but a necessary intervention based on mounting evidence. These labels, akin to those on tobacco products, serve as a constant reminder of the potential risks associated with social media use, particularly among vulnerable youth populations. This initiative reflects an understanding that while social media offers numerous benefits, its unregulated consumption can have severe repercussions on mental health.
Research underscores the complexity of interactions between children, adolescents, and social media platforms. For instance, studies reveal that social media can alter mood states, exacerbate feelings of inadequacy through unrealistic comparisons, and lead to an increased risk of cyberbullying. The cumulative effect of these factors can be profound, contributing to emotional distress and mental health disorders.
Moreover, the recommendation for warning labels brings to light the role of algorithmic transparency in social media’s impact on youth. These algorithms, designed to maximize user engagement, often prioritize sensational or emotionally charged content, which can be particularly enticing to younger users. The proposed labels could prompt a shift toward more ethical algorithmic practices, compelling platforms to modify how content is recommended to young users to mitigate potential harm.
The Surgeon General’s role is primarily advocacy, highlighting the need for these warning labels. The implementation responsibility would likely fall on social media companies, who would be required to post these warnings. The labels could include information about the potential mental health risks of extensive social media use, such as increased anxiety, depression, and cyberbullying.
The policy push also opens up broader dialogues about the efficacy of regulatory measures in protecting young users. It questions whether warning labels are sufficient or if more robust legislative actions are necessary to enforce safer online environments. As these discussions evolve, they must consider the balance between safeguarding mental health and preserving the benefits that social media can offer in terms of connectivity and information access.
As this policy issue continues to develop, it will be crucial for ongoing research to adapt to the rapidly changing digital landscape. Monitoring the effectiveness of implemented measures, such as warning labels, will be essential in determining the actual impact on social media usage patterns among children and adolescents. This analysis must be comprehensive, considering not just the direct effects of warnings, but also the broader implications for social media governance and adolescent mental health.
The Surgeon General is playing an advocacy role by bringing attention to the potential mental health risks of social media use among young people. The responsibility to act on these recommendations typically falls to entities such as lawmakers, regulatory bodies, and social media companies themselves to implement and enforce these measures. As we navigate this complex landscape, the collective effort of all stakeholders—including governments, social media companies, civil societies, and families—is crucial in shaping a safe digital environment that fosters healthy development and well-being for our younger generations.
Engagement Resources
- American Academy of Pediatrics (https://www.aap.org/): Offers guidelines and research on children’s media use and health implications.
- Child Mind Institute (https://childmind.org/): Provides resources on the psychological effects of social media on children and adolescents.
- Common Sense Media (https://www.commonsensemedia.org/): Reviews and rates media and technology for families, offering guidance on healthy media habits.
- Cyberbullying Research Center (https://cyberbullying.org/): Shares research and resources to understand and prevent cyberbullying, a significant risk associated with social media use.
- Family Online Safety Institute (https://www.fosi.org/): Advocates for a safer internet for all, focusing on empowering parents and engaging policymakers.
Stay in-the-know with the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. We depend on support from readers like you to aide in protecting fearless independent journalism, so please consider donating to keep democracy alive today!
The Swing States Series: #2 Michigan
The Swing States Series: #2 Michigan
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #132 | By: Abigail Hunt| June 20, 2024
Featured Photo: www.visittheusa.com
__________________________________
Michigan is 10th in the nation in electoral votes. In 2022, Michigan’s youngest voting demographic, 18–29-year-olds, had the highest turnout in the country at 37 percent, according to Tufts University’s Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (C.I.R.C.L.E.). The national average was 23 percent. On the other hand, 37 percent of the state population is aged 50 or older. Currently, the 10 million strong population ranks it 10th in the nation in size.
Seventy-three percent, or 7.32 million people, of the population is white, and 1.36 million are black. Because 55 percent of blacks live in the South, that latter number doesn’t even put Michigan in the top ten – it ranks 17 in the nation in black population. Michigan’s gender divide is close – 49.8 million male and 50.5 million female. Michigan has strong youth and female populations and a large working class.
The only state in the nation with two peninsulas and five giant lakes which define it, Michigan’s origin story began March 28th, 1836, at a meeting in Washington D.C. By the signatures of U.S. Indian Commissioner Henry Schoolcraft and those of the representatives of the Odawa and Ojibway nations, Michigan tribes ceded 13.8 million acres to the U.S. government. The land was sections of the Upper and Lower Peninsulas that would become 40 percent of the state’s territory. In return, the tribes were promised things, such as permanent reservation land and perpetual access to natural resources, which never manifested. As soon as the native representatives left D.C., white men rewrote the treaty terms granting the tribes just five years of access to the land before giving the government the right to forcibly remove them.
Where are the natives who granted the area enough territory to join the nation? Interestingly, Michigan ranks 10th in the nation in overall population and in Native American population – but the difference in numbers is considerable. To rank 10th in the nation, the state has approximately 148,000 native people among the more than 10-million-strong population.
The Gross State Product (GSP) is $493.2 billion. It is in the top five states in the country for manufacturing. Auto Parts and Automobile Wholesaling are the largest industries in the state, in 2023 generating approximately $78.7 billion and $72.3 billion respectively. The next largest industry is Health & Medical Insurance, which generated $62.7 billion the same year. On a national ranking, Michigan’s GSP is 14th out of 50. The states unemployment rate is 47th in the nation. Approximately 26 percent of workers are in a union or represented by one. The minimum wage in the state increased to $10.33 in 2024.
A significant factor in manufacturing in the state is the access to and utilization of shipping via the Great Lakes. There are an estimated 6,000 shipwrecks in the Great Lakes, some dating back as far as the 17th century. One such shipwreck occurred on November 10th, 1975, in Michigan, when an American Great Lakes taconite (iron ore) freighter, the SS Edmund Fitzgerald, sank. It was on its way from Superior, Wisconsin to Detroit, Michigan on Lake Superior. The ship battled hurricane force winds and 35-foot waves before its demise. A crew of 29 men aboard the ship perished. The Fitz sank in Canadian waters just 16 miles from safety. The following year, a Canadian singer-songwriter, Gordon Lightfoot, wrote a song about the tragedy, and The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald entered the zeitgeist. The songwriter wrote the song to memorialize the lives lost in the tragedy when he noticed that media reports were not bothering to do so. Today, the wreck is the best-known story of shipping disasters from that area. Safety protocols were overhauled after the disaster. It is still the largest and most recent freighter wreck in the state’s history.
In July 2022, Governor Gretchen Whitmer signed into law the Maritime and Port Facility Assistance Grant Program Act, which allows for modernization of Michigan’s 32 ports, upgrading their capabilities to handle container ships, an area of the industry that has historically been inaccessible for the state. In recent news on the East coast, the Dali container ship took out Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key bridge, killing six. Investigators have more questions than answers about the tripped breakers and mysterious blackouts (four, to be precise) that preceded the collision. A chain of reactions, in part human reaction, led to the event. Although Maryland is a far cry from Michigan, both states have active ports with large ships – there are 13 1,000-foot freighters operating still in the Great Lakes, each able to carry between 62K and 89K tons. The Dali container ship is 984 feet long.
There are approximately 360 commercial shipping ports in the U.S., according to statistics from the U.S. Coast Guard. Of these, there are about 150 “deep draft seaports,” some in the Great Lakes. The Port of Detroit is the third-largest steel-handling port in the U.S. and ranks 31 in the Top 50 Ports in the nation. The choice to invest in evolution of maritime trade harkens back to the nation’s beginnings – the 2,340-mile Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway stretches from the Atlantic Ocean to the top of the Great Lakes, on waterways that have been used for shipping since 17th century French traders floated furs on them. Coastal ports in the U.S. have garnered federal grants to the tune of $5 trillion to improve their shipping capabilities. Michigan’s investment in itself facilitates job creation and untold income potential. It is a swing unlikely to miss.
Per World Population Review, Michigan ranks 8th in number of Palestinian citizens, having just shy of 6,000. The state leader, California, has close to 26,000. With a 10 million strong population, almost 6,000 Palestinians do not make up much of the population. Michigan has the largest Middle Eastern population of any U.S. state, with more than 211,000 citizens of that ethnicity. According to Jewish Virtual Library, the state has almost 120,000 Jewish citizens, more than half of the Middle Eastern population. The war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza will certainly be a factor for many voters.
The first Presidential debate took place at the end of June. Trump, fresh out of court with felony convictions, faced off with Biden. It was …. embarrassing to watch – Biden, befuddled and appearing enfeebled, Trump, arrogantly and blatantly bullshitting his way through it. His accomplices from the 2020 election are still muddling their way through their criminal cases. A state Republican politician, James Renner, 77, faces charges from the 2020 election debacle, when he backed the wrong horse. Renner testified in court that he did not know how the election process worked. He is one of 16 Republicans across seven battleground states who have been charged with sending false certificates to Congress stating Trump won the election in their state, contrary to the actual voting results. The certificates were found to be fraudulent in past because they didn’t match the official documents with the Governor’s signature and seal. Perhaps they were bolstered in their deceptive claim by the 2016 results – at that time, the state electors were legally awarded to Trump.
The state’s February 27th primaries awarded 51 delegates to Trump and 55 overall to the Republican Party, as Nikki Haley garnered four delegates. Biden gained 115 delegates in the state and the Democratic Party won 117 overall, more than double what the GOP earned in support. With the two candidates having each won the state respectively in their previous elections, who takes the state this year is a coin toss.
Background Reading on Michigan & Engagement Resources:
- World Population Review. Palestinian Population by State. https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/palestinian-population-by-state
- University at Buffalo. Great Lakes Essential Resources: Shipwrecks. January 8th, 2024. https://research.lib.buffalo.edu/greatlakes/shipwrecks#:~:text=Crossing%20one%20of%20North%20America’s,far%20as%20the%2017th%20century.
- IBIS World. Michigan Economic Overview. https://www.ibisworld.com
- Michigan Department of State. Report: Michigan’s youth turnout in the 2022 election was best in the nation. https://www.michigan.gov/sos/resources/news/2023/04/17/report-michigans-youth-turnout-in-the-2022-election-was-best-in-the-nation
- Michilimackinac State Park Service Center. How Michigan Became a State: The Treaty of Washington, 1836. https://www.mackinacparks.com/how-michigan-became-a-state-the-treaty-of-washington-1836/#:~:text=Without%20the%201836%20Treaty%20of,American%20interests%20during%20treaty%20negotiations
- Tufts University. The Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (C.I.R.C.L.E.). State-by-State Youth Voter Turnout Data and the Impact of Election Laws in 2022. https://circle.tufts.edu/latest-research/state-state-youth-voter-turnout-data-and-impact-election-laws-2022
- United States Census Bureau. Michigan’s Population Topped 10 Million in 2020. Michigan: 2020 Census. August 25, 2021. https://www.census.gov/library/stories/state-by-state/michigan-population-change-between-census-decade.html
- World Population Review. Native American Population by State 2024. https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/native-american-population
- Bloomberg Law. These States Have the Highest and Lowest Minimum Wages. April 15th, 2024. https://pro.bloomberglaw.com/insights/labor-employment/these-states-have-the-highest-and-lowest-minimum-wages/
- U.S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. News Release. January 23, 2024. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/union2.pdf
- G. Guest. University of Michigan. Michigan maritime: Ports set to grow economy throughout the state. December 21, 2022. https://news.umich.edu/michigan-maritime-ports-set-to-grow-economy-throughout-the-state/
- U.S. Department of Transportation. The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation. May 9, 2024. http://www.seaway.dot.gov/about/great-lakes-st-lawrence-seaway-system
- Princeton University. The Pacific Ocean – Maritime Shipping Routes. Mapping Globalization. https://commons.princeton.edu/mg/the-pacific-ocean-maritime-shipping-routes/
- American Israeli Cooperative Enterprise. Jewish Virtual Library. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jewish-population-in-the-united-states-by-state
- C. Williams, J. Cappelletti. Republican Michigan elector testifies he never intended to make false public record. Associated Press. Feb 14, 2024. https://apnews.com/article/michigan-trump-fake-electors-37043f943d888bd14a667b599e3f84d1
This is the second article in a series of articles about U.S Swing States, for the first edition please click here.
Stay in-the-know! Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to help protect democracy and empower citizenship.
Impact of Remote Work on Urban Development
Impact of Remote Work on Urban Development
Economic Policy Brief #62 | By: Inijah Quadri| June 23, 2024
Featured Photo: www.linkedin.com
__________________________________
The shift towards remote work, accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic, has dramatically transformed urban landscapes and commuter behaviors globally. Cities that were once bustling with daily corporate activity are witnessing a shift in their demographic and economic patterns. Remote work has not only changed where people work but also how cities are developed and maintained.
This transformation presents both opportunities and challenges for urban development. On the one hand, it alleviates urban congestion and reduces demand for office space, potentially decreasing pollution and urban decay in central business districts. On the other hand, it also poses significant challenges for local economies that rely heavily on office workers to support service industries, such as retail and hospitality.
As businesses adopt more flexible work policies, the need for large, centralized office spaces has diminished, leading to a rise in vacancy rates in many city centers. This has prompted a reconsideration of urban space usage, with some cities beginning to convert office buildings into residential units or mixed-use developments to revive downtown areas.
Analysis
The impact of remote work extends beyond the physical layout of cities; it also affects municipal planning and public transport systems. With fewer daily commuters, public transportation revenues have decreased, prompting cities to rethink transit services and infrastructure projects. This shift offers an opportunity to redesign urban transport systems to be more efficient and sustainable, potentially incorporating more green spaces and pedestrian-friendly zones as part of broader urban renewal efforts.
Recent studies highlight that as of 2024, the landscape of remote work in the U.S. continues to evolve, with significant demographic and industry shifts noted. Currently, about 14% of all employed adults in the U.S., which translates to roughly 22 million people, work from home all the time. The trend is increasingly favorable among white-collar workers, with 58% preferring to work remotely at least three days a week, and 42% would even accept a 10% pay cut for the flexibility to work remotely. Industries like computer/mathematical fields and business/financial operations report high levels of remote work availability, with 89% and 86% respectively, having the option to work remotely. States like Colorado and Washington lead with the highest proportion of remote workers.
The evolving work environment underscores the necessity for adaptive urban planning and policy measures that accommodate an increasingly remote workforce. Remote work is expected to be a lasting trend, with projections indicating that 22% of the U.S. workforce will be remote by 2025, as per an Upwork study. This shift is driven by worker preferences for flexibility and employer benefits like reduced costs and increased productivity. The trend’s durability is further supported by companies increasingly adopting permanent remote or hybrid models, suggesting a long-term transformation in workplace structures.
Moreover, remote work has prompted a demographic shift towards suburban and rural areas as people seek more spacious and affordable living conditions now that proximity to office locations is less critical. This redistribution of population stresses local infrastructure and necessitates the development of new public amenities and services outside traditional urban centers.
However, the transition to remote work is not without its inequalities. Access to reliable internet and digital literacy skills are prerequisites for remote work, and not all populations have equal access to these resources. As such, there is a risk of widening the socio-economic divide between those who can and cannot work remotely.
Addressing these challenges requires a multidimensional approach involving various stakeholders—governments, urban planners, community organizations, and businesses. Policy measures might include investing in digital infrastructure to support remote work across all communities, re-zoning policies to allow for flexible use of urban space, and strategies to support sectors negatively impacted by the decline in office foot traffic.
Furthermore, urban developers and policymakers need to consider how to create ‘15-minute cities’ where residents can access most of their needs within a short walk or bike ride from their homes, aligning urban development more closely with the realities of a post-pandemic world.
Engagement Resources
- Urban Land Institute (https://uli.org/): A global organization providing leadership in the responsible use of land and in creating and sustaining thriving communities worldwide.
- Smart Growth America (https://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/): Focused on urban planning and policy to create walkable cities that support economically strong, environmentally clean, and socially equitable places.
- National League of Cities (https://www.nlc.org/): Represents thousands of cities, towns, and villages in the US, advocating for policies that promote local leadership and growth for a sustainable future.
- International Downtown Association (https://www.ida-downtown.org/): Supports vibrant city centers around the world, providing insights into economic development, urban planning, and public space management.
- Remote Work Resource Center (https://www.remote.co/remote-work-blog/): Remote.co offers a comprehensive blog and resource center dedicated to advancing remote work. It provides insights and support for policies and practices that encourage remote and flexible work environments.
Stay in-the-know with the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. We depend on support from readers like you to aide in protecting fearless independent journalism, so please consider donating to keep democracy alive today!
We Are Transitioning from Fossil Fuels, but is the Transition Fast Enough?
We Are Transitioning from Fossil Fuels, but is the Transition Fast Enough?
Environment Policy Brief #170 | By: Todd J. Broadman | June 30, 2024
Featured Photo: www.rmi.org
__________________________________
Data on global carbon emissions indicates a decline and that measurable decrease is reason for at least a glimmer of optimism. Both BloombergNEF and Climate Analytics agree that the rate and size of wind and solar electricity generation plants is the primary factor in the change. BloombergNEF goes as far as to say that it may be possible to achieve net zero emissions by 2050, resulting in an average global temperature rise of 1.75 degrees above preindustrial levels.
The downward carbon shift, though minor at this juncture, can be attributed to the deployment and investment in sustainable technologies when and where it makes economic sense. Economics is also the reason for slow adoption. It is more common than not that cost-parity with carbon-sourced power generation cannot be achieved. Further progress is hampered by production delays and the lack of replacement parts. In addition, the necessary capital is usually pushed along with subsidies, premiums, and tax incentives that make the projects pencil-out.
Grassroots level initiatives continue to have a multiplying effect. These local projects are often grant-funded. In Natick, Massachusetts, the Bennett-Hemenway Elementary School will be powered by a solar canopy atop their parking lot thanks to a $2 million dollar grant from the U.S. Dept. of Energy, a small yet impactful slice of the billions that the Biden administration championed for climate and infrastructure projects. At scale is the $2.5 billion dollar Topaz Solar Farm which generates 550 MW located in San Luis Obispo County, California. The station consists of 9 million photovoltaic modules all of which were made in the U.S.
Even with ambitious renewable energy plants like Topaz, fossil fuel-based energy still accounts for 60% of U.S. electricity. There are siting regulations to deal with; there remains strong opposition to wind farms with property owners claiming they reduce property values, resulting in bans or restrictions on large-scale renewable projects for 15 percent of U.S. counties. In light of the slow bureaucratic rollout in carbon-reducing technologies, big oil is getting bigger through consolidation: Exxon Mobil bought Pioneer Natural Resources, Chevron acquired Hess, and ConocoPhillips agreed to buy Marathon Oil.
Making matters more challenging are the contrasting views and communication gaps between activists and the corporate sector. While Tzeporah Berman of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative sees industry as “doing everything they can to make sure that they are the last barrel sold,” former BP chief executive Lord John Browne is part of an effort among corporate executives to shift the bottom line towards pressing environmental concerns. “The hard truth is that we’ve done a poor job of reconciling corporate actions with the interests of society,” he underscores, “the urgent need to do so is undiminished.” Browne currently chairs the $3.5 billion-dollar General Atlantic BeyondNetZero fund.
We also see added policy complexity within China, the world’s biggest carbon emitter. 60 percent of the China’s energy supply comes from coal and they continue to build new coal plants. At the same time, China is also doing more than any other country to develop solar panels and electric vehicles. The International Energy Agency refers to this as policy uncertainty and says that the lurching global rollout of renewable energy capacity, investment gaps in grid infrastructure, and barriers to obtaining permits, all reflect this disjointed effort.
ANALYSIS
The decline in emissions will not be as swift as the biosphere requires. Best guesses put the rise in average global temperature between 1.75 and 2.6 degrees Celsius by the year 2100. Even if every government and large business in the world addressed climate change as a top priority, it would still take at least two decades, and an estimated $215 trillion, to make a full transition to an emissions-free world. Although more than two-thirds of annual multi-national corporate revenues ($31tn) are now aligned with net-zero according to the Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit, this “alignment” is not any more verifiable than China’s proposed commitments to lower carbon emissions. And the world’s second largest CO2 emitter, the U.S., while vocal about its commitments, is mired in red tape and is still largely dependent on imported renewable technologies to update its infrastructure – hardly the global leader espoused by the Biden administration. What is required is something along the lines of a carbon-transition Marshall Plan with the resources, schedule, and unified effort that rebuilt post-war Europe and Japan.
Communities and states are left to raise the sustainability torch. In New York state, there is a large-scale renewable energy transition to develop large-scale land-based renewable energy projects and incentivize sizable clean energy investments. The state’s goal is to obtain 70 percent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2030. This is in line with initiatives in other states and communities nationwide.
Meanwhile, the world relies upon China for the necessary hardware. China makes 80 percent of the world’s solar panel components, 86 percent of lithium-ion batteries, and 67 percent of wind turbine generator covers. In addition, nearly two-thirds of all electric vehicles are made there. At $546 billion dollars, its investments in clean energy and low-carbon manufacturing dwarf the U.S. and Europe. That would seem contrary coming from a country leading the world in CO2 emissions.
Add to this backdrop the pending U.S. election in which Donald Trump has pledged to scrap President Biden’s policies on electric vehicles and wind energy, as well as other initiatives opposed by the fossil fuel industry. As he boasted and cajoled the country’s top oil executives at his Mar-a-Lago Club last month: “You all are wealthy enough,” he said, “that you should raise $1 billion to return me to the White House.” His carrot was his promise to immediately reverse dozens of President Biden’s environmental rules and policies and stop new ones from being enacted. Regardless of the politics, the economics are tilting towards renewable energy – a slow, uneven tilt to be sure.
Engagement Resources:
- https://climateanalytics.org/ connects science and policy to empower vulnerable countries in international climate negotiations and inform national planning with targeted research, analysis and support.
- https://about.bnef.com/ is a leading provider of primary research and analysis on the trends driving the transition to a lower-carbon economy.
- https://eciu.net/ The Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit is a non-profit organization that supports informed debate on energy and climate change issues in the UK.
Don’t miss out on the latest insights from our dedicated reporters – subscribe to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. Your support is vital in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you value our content, please consider donating today to help protect democracy and empower citizenship.
Putin’s Ceasefire Proposition. Peace or Nonsense?
Putin’s Ceasefire Proposition. Peace or Nonsense?
Foreign Policy Brief #147 | By: Yelena Korshunov| June 25, 2024
Featured Photo: www.business-standard.com
__________________________________
On June 14th, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin spoke about conditions for negotiations on Ukraine. He proposed that Ukrainian troops must be withdrawn from all the territory of the “new regions of Russia”, and Kyiv must abandon its intentions to join NATO. “Our conditions”, he said at the meetings with the leadership of Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, “for starting such a conversation… are very simple. Ukrainian troops must be completely withdrawn from the entire territory of DPR [Donetsk People’s Republic], LPR [Luhansk People’s Republics], Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia regions.” Putin stated that as soon as Kiev expresses its readiness to agree to these conditions, and officially notifies the world about the abandonment of plans to join NATO, Russian will immediately order a ceasefire and begin negotiations. Besides these demands, Putin’s list of conditions includes “demilitarization and denazification” of Ukraine, fixation of the statuses of Crimea, Sevastopol, DPR, LPR, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions as Russian regions in international treaties, and cancellation of all Western sanctions against Russia.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine criticized the “peace proposal” of the Russian leader. They believe that Putin made another series of manipulative statements in order to mislead the international community, undermine diplomatic efforts to achieve peace, and split the unity of the world majority around the goals and principles of the UN Charter.
Commenting on Putin’s statement before the Ukraine Peace Summit in Switzerland, Zelensky noted that Putin makes a mistake proposing “to withdraw from some of our territories that are under our control.” Zelensky said that the “frozen conflict doesn’t suit us.” The Ukrainian president called Putin a person that “does not want to end the war, but wants to seize territories. According to Zelensky, Russia has committed many tragic historical mistakes, starting with the occupation of Crimea.
Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni called the Russian president’s plan “propaganda”. She said that “it doesn’t seem particularly effective to me as a negotiation proposal to tell Ukraine that it must withdraw from Ukraine.” German Chancellor Olaf Scholz dismissed Putin’s ultimatum as a “dictatorial peace”. Britain’s Prime Minister Rishi Sunak accused the Russian president of “spinning a phony narrative about his willingness to negotiate”. He also added that countries helping Russia with weapon supplies “are on the wrong side of history”. “I believe that we will witness history being made here at the summit. May a just peace be established as soon as possible,” he said. Chinese officials kept silent about Putin’s proposition.
Policy Analysis
In October 2022, Putin signed constitutional laws on the incorporation of four partially occupied Ukrainian regions into Russia, and completed a formal Russia-only process of annexation. On the basis of these laws, amendments were made to the Constitution of Russia – the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions, as well as the Luhansk and Donetsk “people’s republics” were added to it as subjects of the Russian Federation. It includes Ukrainian land that Russia has been unable to seize despite constant “meat attacks” (called so for using a huge number of Russian soldiers thrown into the attack to storm positions with their bodies).
Let’s assume Ukraine will follow Putin’s “ceasefire proposition”, letting go of the territories that Putin is unable to occupy despite a huge numerical superiority of Russian troops and generous arms supply from Russia’s partners. Let’s imagine that Ukraine will turn away from the Western world, democracy, and civilization toward the dark ages values cultivated in today’s Russia. What happens next? How long will it take for Putin’s Russia to gather strength and produce plenty of weapons to attack Ukraine again, invading it and annexing more of its territory? In 2014, in a statement about the annexation of Crimea, Putin assured the world that Russia does not intend to annex other territories of Ukraine. However, Putin’s appetite increased, and on the morning of February 24th, 2022 Russia’s invasion of Ukraine began. Soon after that in his address to the nation, Vladimir Putin assured Russians that the occupation of Ukrainian not planned. At the very same time of Putin’s speech peppered with prison jargon, Russia shelled Ukrainian cities, inflicting mass civilian casualties and ruin. Extensive territories of Ukraine were initially invaded in 2022 at the start of the war. In one grizzly instance, heading to Kiev, Russian troops sojourned in Bucha, committing widely denounced acts of killing, humiliation, and torture on local civilians. Ukrainian’s counterattacked, liberating much captured land, but hitherto a significant portion of southeastern Ukraine is still occupied by Russia. For over two years, thousands of Ukrainians have given their lives fighting for their land and reclaiming their right for freedom and democracy, while young Russians die for the whimsical imperial designs of one ambitious man.
Stay informed with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to continue in helping to protect democracy and empower citizenship.
The New York Trial that No One is Paying Attention To
The New York Trial that No One is Paying Attention To
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #131 | By: Arvind Salem| June 20, 2024
Featured Photo: www.bloomberg.com
__________________________________
While President Trump’s trial in New York, and eventual conviction, generated wall-to-wall news coverage, the bribery trial of Senator Robert Menendez occurring just yards away has generated comparatively little attention. However, this trial features more serious accusations: alleging that the senator consistently used his considerable influence as (now former) Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for personal gain, while selling out the American people.
At the simplest level, prosecutors are alleging that Menendez accepted bribes worth hundreds of thousands of dollars from several New Jersey businessmen in exchange for political favors. Prosecutors are also charging the people that have given Mr. Menendez money. One of them, Jose Uribe, a former Insurance broker in New Jersey, pleaded guilty in March to giving the Senator a Mercedes-Benz worth $60,000 to intervene in state insurance fraud investigations against Uribe’s insurance associates. The others that are also charged haven’t flipped, including Fred Daibes, a Real Estate Developer, who allegedly bribed the senator with furniture, gold and cash to help him finance a real estate project, and Wael Hana, the Founder of the IS EG Halal company, who allegedly assisted in arranging meetings with the senator and Egyptian officials that led to a monopoly for his company, IS EG Halal, that was used to funnel bribes to the Senator and his wife in exchange for the senator’s efforts to steer U.S. weapons and aid to Egypt.
This isn’t the first time Menendez has been accused of a serious crime like this. In 2017, federal prosecutors charged him with using his office to help a friend defraud Medicare. The result of that trial was a deadlocked jury and prosecutors deciding against holding another trial. In 2018, Menendez was backed by the establishment and won reelection.
Policy Analysis:
On a political level, this isn’t horrible for Democrats. Even though control in the Senate as a whole is very tight, and losing a senior Democrat in this way isn’t ideal, New Jersey’s Senate Seats themselves are not a risk to fall to the GOP as the GOP hasn’t won a U.S. Senate election in New Jersey since 1972. Representative Andy Kim from the 3rd District looks poised to win the Democratic Primary and help Democrats keep the seat. With this in mind, it makes clear political sense for Democrats to denounce Menendez and distance themselves from him, as they are virtually guaranteed to hold the seat without his influence. Over half of all Democratic US Senators in Congress, including fellow New Jersey Senator Cory Booker, and New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy have called on Menendez to resign. Menendez has expressed that he wants to keep his seat, resisting calls to resign, and filing for re-election as an Independent.
Legally, Menendez is employing the risky strategy of pinning everything on his wife: arguing that his wife did everything illegally without informing her husband. This initially displays some promise. In terms of fact, it is true that the couple had separate bank accounts, credit cards and cell phone plans. Additionally, Mr. Menendez’s wife, Nadine Menendez, even in the prosecution’s account of things, was often the intermediary between the businessmen and the senator. In terms of legality, the fact that Nadine and Robert are being tried separately, as well as the privilege against self-incrimination and legal doctrine that protects the marital relationship, enables both to point the finger at the other and the spouse that is accused can hide being the legal protections against self-incrimination and the protections of marriage. However, this strategy can backfire if the jury perceives it as a powerful senator attempting to scapegoat his less powerful wife: leading the jury to be outraged on two fronts as they perceive the defendant as guilty of the actual crime itself and of trying to scapegoat their “innocent” spouse.
Engagement Resources
In light of this indictment, it is clear that politicians possess the ability to use their influence in corrupt ways. The following are a list of organizations/initiatives that work towards greater government transparency to prevent corruption like what is alleged in this trial.
Stay in-the-know! Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to help protect democracy and empower citizenship.
The Supreme Court Bump Stock Ruling Explained
The Supreme Court Bump Stock Ruling Explained
Civil Rights Policy Brief #226 | By: Arvind Salem | June 25, 2024
Featured Photo: www.newsnationnow.com
__________________________________
On October 1, 2017, a shooter equipped with a bump stock, a contraption fixed to assault rifles and generating automatic fire with a single trigger pull, opened fire at the Route 91 Festival shooting in Las Vegas, NV, executing the deadliest mass shooting in American history, tragically killing 58 individuals.
In the aftermath of this shooting, following pressure to ban bump stocks, the Justice Department’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) under the Trump administration banned bump stocks for civilian use. However, as a federal agency, rather than Congress, its authority stretched only to enforcing existing law, not creating new ones. Yet, the ATF justified their rule as an extension of the ban on machine guns, relying on the “… National Firearms Act, which defined machine guns as weapons that can “automatically” fire more than one shot “by a single function of the trigger.””
The Court, in a 6-3 decision across ideological lines on the case Garland v. Cargill, ultimately ruled that this regulation was an unconstitutional overreach of executive authority. Justice Thomas, writing for the majority, wrote that “We hold that a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock is not a ‘machine gun’ because it cannot fire more than one shot ‘by a single function of the trigger”
In dissent, Justice Sotomayor criticized the Court for focusing on the technical inner workings of a gun, made clear not only by Justice Thomas’s language, but also by the fact that he employed many diagrams to explain his opinion, rather than focusing on the equivalent effects of both firearms on the victim. Referencing the similar characteristics, Sotomayor wrote that “When I see a bird that walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck.”
Policy Analysis:
This decision is notable not only as another example towards the court’s seeming hostility towards gun control regulations, but also for its implications on other, newer, gun control regulations. These accessories, like bump stocks, have the net effect of turning legal semi automatic weapons into illegal machine guns. Many of these accessories are specific types of triggers, such as forced-reset triggers” or “wide-open triggers”, that allow shooters to fire more than 900 rounds in a minute with one continuous squeeze. In 2022, the AFT imposed restrictions on these triggers, but with this latest decision, gun owners could sue, and with this case as a precedent, spelling doom for these regulations. In fact, immediately after the court issued its ruling, lawyers for gun-rights groups suing to overturn the trigger restrictions filed a letter, which cited the new bump-stock decision. Through this decision, the court has set, or at least largely clarified, their definition of what constitutes a machine gun: that step is a critically important one for all cases involving gun accessories.
Engagement Resources
The following are all gun advocacy groups that argue for responsible gun control legislation and work to educate the public and legislators on the necessity of gun regulations. Given the executive branch’s diminished ability to act on this issue following this decision, readers interested in supporting gun control advocacy may be interested in these groups that also focus on legislative advocacy on all aspects of this issue.
Stay in-the-know with the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. We depend on support from readers like you to aide in protecting fearless independent journalism, so please consider donating to keep democracy alive today!
AIPAC’s War Chest Draws Opposition
AIPAC’s War Chest Draws Opposition
Foreign Policy Brief #146 | By: Mindy Spatt| June 18, 2024
Featured Photo: www.middleeastmonitor.com
__________________________________
AIPAC’s Political Action Committee has a huge war chest and has announced plans to spend it defeating “the Squad” and other legislators it believes are insufficiently pro-Israel. To do so the group is allying itself with republican donors and candidates, some of whom are hard core Trump supporters. Progressive Jewish groups are pushing back, but J Street, the liberal lobbying alternative to AIPAC, is not among them.
Analysis
The powerful pro-Israel lobbying organization AIPAC, the American Public Affairs Council, has announced plans to spend a $100 million war chest to defeat the Squad and other elected officials who have spoken out publicly in support of a ceasefire in Gaza, opposed military aid to Israel or are perceived as pro-Palestinian. Although AIPAC’s efforts often focus on defeating progressives by pushing more moderate democrats, several high profile republican donors are major contributors to AIPAC’s Political Action Committee, the United Democracy Project including Paul Singer, a Nikki Haley megadonor, and the sponsor of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s luxury vacations.
One of AIPAC’S top targets is New York City District 16 Representative Jamaal Bowman. Bowman was one of the first in Congress to call for a ceasefire, and has been outspoken in his opposition the war in Gaza. Bowman’s challenger for the democratic nomination is George Latimer, a Westchester County official who entered the race with the backing of AIPAC. J Street, the lobbying firm that formed as liberal alternative to AIPAC’s hard line on Israel has backed Bowman in the past, but will not support him in this year. The group issued a statement saying “We have been pleased to work with Congressman Bowman for over four years to promote a shared set of values and principles rooted in the pursuit of justice, equality, and peace. The past few months have, however, highlighted significant differences between us in framing and approach.”
Despite record spending, AIPAC has had limited success. Dave Min, a moderate state senator running for California’s Representative Katie Porter’s House seat, has not called for a Ceasefire, but has been critical of Israeli prime minister Bibi Netanyahu. AIPAC put $4.5 million into his primary race, but their candidate failed to beat him. AIPAC also failed to defeat Summer Lee, a freshman congresswoman from Western Pennsylvania who won election to Congress two years ago despite millions being spent by AIPAC and other pro-Israel groups who consider her pro-Palestinian. AIPAC didn’t waste much of its money on her recent reelection bid, but Republican megadonor Jeffrey Yass did, bankrolling ads attacking Lee for calling for a ceasefire and supporting her opponent, Bhavini Patel, who Lee easily defeated.
With J Street no longer providing an alternative for progressive Jews a new coalition has sprung up to oppose AIPAC’s influence, simply called “Reject AIPAC.” Leading anti-occupation groups involved in the campaign include the Justice Democrats, the advocacy arm of Jewish Voice for Peace and the activist organization IfNotNow. Other established progressives in the coalition include the Sunrise Movement and the Working Families Party. “We have watched as AIPAC has done everything it can to silence growing dissent in Congress against Netanyahu’s assault on Gaza,” said the coalition in a statement, “even as Democratic voters overwhelmingly support a ceasefire and oppose sending more blank checks to the Israeli military.”
The coalition recently announced that it plan to spends a least a million dollars to defend the Squad and other lawmakers who have earned AIPAC’s ire. They are highlighting the “dark money” bankrolling AIPAC’s campaigns and urging democratic candidates not to accept funding from AIPAC or seek its endorsement. Eva Borgwardt, IfNotNow’s Political Director said in a statement, “AIPAC is not just an obstacle to progress for Israelis and Palestinians. Their intervention in Democratic primaries serves as a huge obstacle to necessary policies like universal healthcare, meaningful climate action, and workers’ rights. AIPAC’s endorsement should be as welcome in progressive circles as the NRA or the fossil fuel lobby.”
Engagement Resources:
- AIPAC’s Dark Money Arm Unleashes $100 Million Blitz on Progressives, by Brett Wilkins, March 4, 2024, https://www.commondreams.org/news/aipac-2024
- United Democracy Project Outside Spending Summary 2024, https://www.opensecrets.org/outside-spending/detail/2024?cmte=C00799031&tab=summary
- Reject AIPAC, https://www.rejectaipac.org
Stay informed with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to continue in helping to protect democracy and empower citizenship.
The Murky World Of Sports Betting
The Murky World Of Sports Betting
Social Justice Policy Brief #166 | By: Reilly Fitzgerald | June 19, 2024
Featured Photo: www.thehill.com
__________________________________
Sports betting is an industry worth $330 billion; at least the legal side of it is. It is also an industry that is very much of questionable morals. The United Nations has stated in their Global Report on Corruption in Sport (2021) that the sports betting industry is the #1 factor in sports corruption. This has been seen around the world with individual leagues, teams, athletes, sponsors, and more, getting into major legal trouble over the placing of bets. Sports betting has led to organizations, both law enforcement and sports-oriented, to partner together to attempt to solve this issue before it becomes an even larger problem.
Analysis
In the United States, sports betting has had an intriguing history. Obviously, some sports are well-known for betting and wagers like horse racing. In 1992, the United States Congress passed the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA), which outlawed sports betting federally; with some exceptions. Fast-forward to 2018 and the United States Supreme Court case Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA); the United States Supreme Court ruling in this case struck down PASPA and allowed for states to determine whether or not to allow legalized sports betting. According to ESPN, sports betting has taken-off as a major industry across the United States (bringing in $330 billion in six years of legalization); over 30 states have legalized sports gambling, along with DC and Puerto Rico.
Legalized sports betting has taken many shapes ever since the 2018 decision; however, it has never been made more readily available to the average person as it is now. There are hundreds of online platforms for people to join and place their bets. Some of the major names of companies operating in the US are DraftKings Sportsbook, ESPN BET, BetMGM Sportsbook, FanDuel Sportsbooks, and Fanatics Sportsbook among MANY others. These are all accessible as websites or mobile apps that function with both Android or Apple iOS. Some of these platforms also allow for users to play their favorite casino games too, aside from the sports gambling; and some are even partnered with, or run by, some of the largest casinos. For example, Caesars Entertainment owns the famed Caesars hotel and casino in Las Vegas but they also operate Caesars Sportsbook (another online sports gambling platform). All of these sites make access to potential earnings quite easy to access, and many over multiple ways to place bets. DraftKings has over 18 sports that are available for placing bets; the soccer section, for example, has over 40 different leagues and tournaments to bet on (and again, that is just for soccer).
Joseph Gillespie of the FBI, agent in charge of their unit that targets sports gambling, has gone on record as stating that sports gambling allows for a gateway for organized crime to create profits extort money around the world. The FBI is not the only law enforcement or regulatory entity interested in cracking down on illegal sports gambling. INTERPOL has also been gathering data and working on impacting the illegal sports gambling industry. FIFA, at their last World Cup in 2022 in Qatar, trained 400 football Integrity officers to ensure that there was no risk, or instances, of match manipulation; according to FIFA, no examples of match manipulation were found.
It appears that each league, or competition (World Cup or Olympics), are in charge of setting their own rules as far as sports betting is concerned; what I mean is that there is not one governing body of all sports in the world that has created a rule on this issue. For example the English Football Association’s (The FA) rule on sports betting is that “no participant can bet on a match or competition that they are involved in” that season; and participants are “prohibited” from passing inside information for betting purposes. The International Olympics Committee (IOC) has, since 2006, included a provision regarding sports betting in their Code of Ethics, that says it “prohibits all accredited persons at the Olympic Games from betting on Olympic events.”
There have been several high-profile cases of athletes being busted and severely punished for their role in illegal sports gambling. Ottawa Senator hockey player Shane Pinto received a 41 game suspension for his role in placing bets. Toronto Raptor basketball player Jontay Porter is facing a life suspension from the NBA for his role in illegal sports gambling. In the English Premier League, there have been three high-profile cases of illegal sports gambling and the role of league players. Newcastle United’s Sandro Tonali missed most of the 2023-2024 season due to committing 50 breaches of English Premier League sports betting rules; he is allowed to return at the end of August 2024 for the upcoming season. However, if he has one more breach of sports betting rules, he will miss the entirety of the 2024-2025 Premier League season, according to Sky Sports. Brentford FC player Ivan Toney has been diagnosed with a gambling addiction, according to the Associated Press, for violating over 200 breaches of the Premier League’s sports betting rules; he served an eight month ban and returned in January this year to playing. Toney’s breaches included 13 instances where he placed bets on his own team to lose matches (clear examples of match fixing). Most recently, Lucas Paqueta is being charged with “alleged failures to comply” with an FA investigation into four matches during the 2022-2023 season that he allegedly was intentionally gaining yellow cards in matches due to bets that were placed. Paqueta denies these charges.
It is clear that sports gambling is a clear and present danger to the world of clean sport and fair competition as we know it. The sports world has always had its fair share of illegality and impropriety, you need only to look at the role of performance enhancing drugs in sports like baseball and cycling to understand that. However, I think this could be the next hurdle for the governing bodies of sports to tackle.
Engagement Resources
- FA Sports Betting Rules Page – https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/policies/betting-rules#:~:text=No%20Participant%20can%20bet%20on,passing%20inside%20information%20for%20betting
- IOC Prevention of Competition Manipulation –https://olympics.com/ioc/integrity/prevention-competition-manipulation
Wanna stay in-the-know? Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter, and please consider contributing to ‘Keeping Democracy Alive’ by donating today! We depend on support from readers like you to aide in protecting fearless independent journalism.