Sign up for updates
Donate today
Join our newsletter
JOBS

JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES

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

Latest Jobs Posts

 

The Challenges of Appealing The Trump Classified Documents Case

Brief #229 – Civil Rights Policy Brief
by: Rod Maggay

The Trump classified documents case presents a pivotal moment in legal history, as the dismissal by Judge Aileen Cannon and subsequent appeal by Special Counsel Jack Smith challenge established legal precedents. As the case navigates through the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, its outcome could have far-reaching implications for the 2024 presidential election and the rule of law.

read more

Resilience and Tradition: The Political Heartbeat of West Texas

Brief #135 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by: Morgan Davidson

West Texas, a region defined by its rugged independence and deep-rooted conservatism, stands as a political powerhouse with its unwavering support for traditional values and industries like oil and agriculture. Amid rising challenges like water scarcity and healthcare disparities, the resilience of its people and their fervent participation in elections underscore the indomitable spirit of this often-overlooked corner of the Lone Star State.

read more

Putin and Trump’s Connections: Onstage and Behind the Scenes, Part 1: The Russian Trace

Brief #151 – Foreign Policy Brief
by: Yelena Korshunov

The intricate and often clandestine ties between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump have captivated global attention, intertwining political maneuvers with allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. As new revelations emerge, the depth of Putin and Trump’s relationship continues to unfold, raising critical questions about the geopolitical implications of their mutual influences.

read more

Olympic Games Political and Social Issues, Early Update

Brief #150 – Foreign Policy Brief
by: Reilly Fitzgerald

As the Paris 2024 Olympic Games commence, the event is already overshadowed by criminal activity, doping scandals, and significant missteps in representation, raising serious questions about the integrity of the Games. With the Seine’s murky waters and security threats looming, this monumental celebration of sport finds itself at a tumultuous crossroads between tradition and modernity.

read more

AI: Is It Worth the Climate Cost?

Brief #113 – Technology Policy Brief
by : Mindy Spatt

AI’s rapid rise is accelerating energy consumption and greenhouse emissions at an alarming rate, posing a serious environmental threat that rivals pandemics and nuclear war. With data centers and extensive computational workloads driving this surge, the urgent question remains: do we truly need this technology given its staggering climate cost?

read more

President Biden Drops Out, Vice President Harris Moves In

Brief #134 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by: Arvind Salem

In a stunning turn of events, President Biden has withdrawn from the 2024 election, endorsing Vice President Harris as his successor amidst concerns about his mental acuity and poor polling performance. With the Democratic party in disarray and the clock ticking down to Election Day, Harris faces the formidable challenge of unifying the party and defeating a resurgent Donald Trump.

read more

Trump Got Shot: Is It Time for Another Debate About Gun Ownership Laws?

Brief #168 – Social Justice Policy Brief
by: Inijah Quadri

The recent attempt on Donald Trump’s life has reignited the fierce debate over gun ownership laws in the United States, highlighting the deep divide between gun rights advocates and proponents of stricter regulations. As the nation grapples with this latest incident, the urgent question remains: how can we balance constitutional rights with the imperative to prevent gun violence?

read more

Who is JD Vance?

Brief #133 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by: Arvind Salem

In a dramatic turn of events, Donald Trump selects JD Vance as his vice-presidential candidate, igniting controversy and debate. Vance, known for his memoir “Hillbilly Elegy” and shifting political stances, epitomizes the complex intersection of personal narrative and political ambition in today’s America.

read more
Jobs01 e1489352304814
The Tech Companies Feting and Financing Trump

The Tech Companies Feting and Financing Trump

The Tech Companies Feting and Financing Trump

Technology Policy Brief #112 | By: Mindy Spatt | June 17, 2024
Featured Photo by Indy Silva for U.S. Resist News, 2024

__________________________________

Apparently no one can stay mad at Donald Trump for long, especially if they’re a billionaire.  Not Blackstone Equity Group CEO Steve Schwarzman,  who has dropped his calls for new republican leadership and is backing Trump.  Not high profile hedge fund manager Nicolas Pelz, who publicly regretted voting for Trump after January 6 but now is back on board.  Not David Sacks, the venture capitalist who recently hosted Trump for a fundraiser at his San Francisco mansion despite having previously said Trump should be disqualified from holding office. And not Jacob Helberg, who had a key role in Pete Buttigieg’s campaign in 2020 and recently threw $1 million Trump’s way.

Analysis

Sack’s gathering – where top tickets were $500,000 per couple – was reportedly sold out and raised $12 million for the former president, who has been raking in cash all over the country since he was convicted of 34 felonies.  Executives from tech companies including Coinbase and the crypto investor twins Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss were in attendance and were apparently wooed by Trump’s vows to go after Senator Elizabeth Warren, who advocates for enhanced consumer protections for crypto buyers.  Sacks and his cohost, Chamath Palihapitiya, both have huge investments in bitcoin.

Also on hand for the party was Stuart Alderoty, the Chief Legal Officer of bitcoin company Ripple.  While the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is seeking $2 billion in fines and penalties against Ripple, industry groups are pushing a bill in Congress, the Financial Innovation And Technology for the 21st Century Act, that would drastically cut away at the SEC’s powers.

It’s no surprise the notoriously anti-regulation tech sector is aligned with Trump, who is bullishly against any form of regulation or consumer protection.  Most technology companies opposed Biden’s appointment of Lina Kahn as Chair of the Federal Trade Commission, knowing she would aggressively pursue monopoly charges against Amazon and huge companies.

Over at the Labor Department Biden’s pick for Secretary, Julie Su, still hasn’t been confirmed and faces vociferous opposition from Uber, Lyft and other companies that use gig workers and fear Su would institute expanded rights for them.

Shaun Maguire, a partner at the venture capital firm Sequoia Capital, which has interests in Nividia, Reddit, Instacart, Google Door Dash Apple, previously voted democratic but announced he would back Trump just hours after Trump was convicted on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records.

Without acknowledging the economic synergies between his companies and Trump’s policies, Maguire posted on X shortly after Trumps’ conviction “I just donated $300k to President Trump,” adding,  “The timing isn’t a coincidence.”

Alderoy’s Ripple is one of the tech companies behind Fairshake, a super PAC which is set to spend close to $100 million to influence elections in November.  In a recent report on a major crypto conference Rueters described  Ripple President Monica Long as “optimistic that a lobbying push by the crypto industry will yield results in this year’s U.S. elections.”

Jacob Helberg, the former Buttigieg supporter, is a senior advisor at Palantir, an artificial intelligence firm that does extensive government contracting work, including with the U.S. Department of Defense.  He may not be a billionaire on his own, but he is married to one, venture capitalist Keith Rabios.  Helberg called the San Francisco event “proof that President Trump’s campaign is creating a generational realignment among technology founders, Millennials, gays & Jewish Americans that transcends party lines and makes him more competitive in even the most traditionally blue communities.”

Many of us here in San Francisco would emphatically disagree with Helberg.  Some made their feelings known to Trump and his friends with 33 foot tall chicken balloon in Trump’s likeness, dressed in a striped prison suit, that cruised the bay in front of Alcatraz Island and was likely visible from the pricey party.

Engagement Resources


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!

Story of Pulitzer winner Vladimir Kara-Murza, an oppositionist imprisoned in Russia: Part 2

Story of Pulitzer winner Vladimir Kara-Murza, an oppositionist imprisoned in Russia: Part 2

“Others will come to take our place.”

Story of Pulitzer winner Vladimir Kara-Murza, an oppositionist imprisoned in Russia: Part 2

Foreign Policy Brief #145 | By: Yelena Korshunov| June 10, 2024
Featured Photo: www.reuters.com

__________________________________

In September 2023, the US Embassy in Moscow issued a public press statement dedicated to Russian publicist, politician, and historian Vladimir Kara-Murza’s imprisonment, “The United States strongly condemns the politically motivated case against Mr. Kara-Murza and the Russian government’s escalating campaign of repression against those who want their voices to be heard in the direction of the country. We reiterate our call for the immediate release of Mr. Kara-Murza, as well as the release of more than 600 political prisoners in Russia.”

In April 2024 the US State Department issued a statement on the two-year anniversary of the detention of Vladimir Kara-Murza by Russian authorities, “Two years ago, Russian authorities detained Vladimir Kara-Murza on flimsy and politically motivated grounds, accusing him of opposing the Russian government’s war against Ukraine,” states foreign ministry spokesman Matthew Miller. “His unjust sentence, egregious 25-year sentence, and ongoing prison sentence demonstrate the Kremlin’s desire to silence dissent, punish critics, and suppress fundamental freedoms. He [Kara-Murza] continues to demonstrate commitment to the principles of democracy, freedom of speech and the rule of law in a country where the government does everything possible to suppress them,” a State Department spokesman said. “We stand in solidarity with Kara-Murza and his family at this difficult time and once again call for his release, as well as the release of all political prisoners unjustly detained in Russia.”

Members of the US Senate and House of Representatives called for the Biden administration to officially label Russian opposition leader Vladimir Kara-Murza as “unlawfully and wrongfully detained”. The politician was sentenced to a long term for “a powerful voice in support of democratic Russia and dreams of a peaceful rule of law state”, and “his only crime was opposing the crimes of the Putin regime,” emphasizes the letter from congressmen and senators. The appeal, initiated by the head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Ben Cardin and Senator Roger Wicker, notes that Kara-Murza is a legal permanent resident of the United States, and his wife and three children are US citizens. “Releasing him and saving his life is in the national interests of the United States. The time has come to act,” they say in Congress. The appeal to the US administration was signed by 80 legislators from both houses of parliament and from both major parties – Republican and Democratic.

After the death of Aleksei Navalny, Vladimir Kara-Murza sent an open letter to the Russian opposition portal Medusa now located in Latvia. “Remember, Brodsky [Iosef Brodsky – Nobel laureate, Russian poet and essayist, 1940-1996] wrote to a friend that he [Brodsky] liked a thief better than a bloodsucker. Today there is no such choice – the people in power in Russia embody both. And they are completely hypocritical and deceitful,” he said in the letter. “Official propaganda has been creating a myth about Putin’s ‘popularity’ for many years. Even some opponents of the current government believe in this. But a strong and popular leader is not afraid of opponents – he defeats them in open debate and in free elections. Putin’s regime relies on instilling fear in society and destroying any alternative – not in the figurative, but in the literal sense of the word.”

“The Putin’s regime is not really fighting the opposition – it is fighting the future”, he continued. “This, of course, can be done for some time (even, as we see, quite a long time) but the result is still clear in advance. It is impossible to stop the future. Russia will definitely become a democracy. In the foreseeable future it [Russia] will be a ‘normal European country’ that Alexei Navalny liked to talk about. I am telling you this as a historian. Even if they kill all of us, who today are called ‘faces of the opposition,’ it means that others will come to take our place.”

For part one of the Kara-Murza series, click here.

Engagement Resources

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.

TIME FOR A U.S. MIDDLE EAST PEACE POLICY

TIME FOR A U.S. MIDDLE EAST PEACE POLICY

TIME FOR A U.S. MIDDLE EAST PEACE POLICY

JUNE OP ED | By: Ron Israel & the U.S. Resist News Staff | June 2024
Featured Photo: www.hoover.org

__________________________________

We believe President Biden should announce a sweeping policy aimed at promoting a broad-based Middle East Peace. Such a policy would help win him points with disaffected voters, especially young people, and encourage those in countries throughout the region who put peace above their own country’s current narrow self-interest. We suggest that Biden’s Peace in the Middle East Policy contain the following elements:

‣ Recognition of Palestinian Statehood: 144 of the 193 member countries of the United Nations have already recognized Palestinian statehood, including France Belgium, Ireland, Spain and Norway.  The United States needs to join this list. Palestinian statehood is a precursor to the establishment of a two-state solution.

‣ Endorsing the International Legal Decisions on the Israel/Hamas War: The International Criminal Court  (ICC)and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) In recent weeks have each made decisions indicting Israeli leadership for its conduct of the war in Gaza (in violation of international law). The US has condemned these decisions and refused to join the long list of countries supporting them. This reaction sets the U.S. apart from the rest of the world and damages our reputation as a supporter of international justice.

‣ Suspending Provision of Military Assistance: The U.S. needs to suspend any further military assistance to Israel that will help perpetuate the war in Gaza. The U.S. has long supported Israel’s right to defend itself in a sea of hostile neighbors, but we need to draw the line when it comes to Israel’s use of our military aid for the war in Gaza.

‣ Endorsing and Providing Leadership for a 2-State Solution:  Supporting the establishment of a Palestinian state, on equal footing with Israel, seems to be the only sustainable solution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. The United States needs to come out and openly endorse such  a solution. We need to pledge resources to help a 2-State come into being, such as providing training to strengthen the governance capacity of Palestinian leadership. We need to support free and fair elections in Palestine.

‣ Providing Leadership for a Middle East Marshall Plan: Gaza faces an enormous task of rebuilding itself after the conclusion of its war with Israel. Other areas in the Middle East, e.g. Syria and Lebanon, that have been damaged in conflict, also face large reconstruction challenges. The United States needs to lead and support an effort to provide reconstruction aid and assistance to these countries, an effort similar in scope to the Marshal Plan at that supported the reconstruction of Europe at the end of World War II.

‣ Support for the Recognition of Israel: Once the Gaza war is over the U.S. should continue efforts,  begun under the Abrahamic accords, to persuade other Middle Eastern countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Lebanon, to recognize Israel. Increased recognition of Israel in the region will help ease tensions

‣ Increased Recognition of  the Rights  of Women and Other Basic Human Rights:  In many Middle Eastern countries the rights to equal opportunity for women and other human rights are being denied. An essential part of the US policy for peace in the Middle East needs to be a call for all countries in the region to support human rights, especially the rights of women.

Unfortunately there may be little likelihood that the U.S. will invoke such a comprehensive Peace in the Middle East Policy. However, there would be huge political and diplomatic upsides if we were to do so. President Biden would likely gain increased voter support especially from young people supporting the Palestinian cause. And the U.S. would strengthen its relationships with countries in the region who tend to sympathize with the Palestinians.

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. 

Louisiana Requiring Display of Ten Commandments In All Public Schools Is Unconstitutional

Louisiana Requiring Display of Ten Commandments In All Public Schools Is Unconstitutional

Louisiana Requiring Display of Ten Commandments In All Public Schools Is Unconstitutional

Civil Rights Policy Brief #225 | By: Rod Maggay | June 10, 2024

Featured Photo: www.nbcnews.com

__________________________________

Policy Summary: During the 2024 Regular Session of the Louisiana State Legislature House Bill No. 71 was introduced. The bill’s purpose is to require every elementary, secondary and post-secondary public school in the state and every non – public school that receives state funding to display prominently in each classroom a copy of the Ten Commandments.

The bill includes technical requirements regarding the display (size of poster, location of the text on the poster, size of font) and the commandments that are mandated to be listed as part of the commandment set.

Both houses of the Louisiana State Legislature have Republican majorities and House Bill No. 71 passed overwhelmingly in both houses. However, passage was not unanimous as a number of Democrats voted against the bill. Governor Jeff Landry, a Republican, has signaled that he supports the bill and intends to sign the bill when it reaches his desk. If the bill becomes law, Louisiana would become the first state in the country to require the display of the Ten Commandments in all of a state’s school. LEARN MORE

Policy Analysis: Louisiana House Bill No. 71 is part of a current, larger trend where states are trying to insert Christianity and religion into more aspects of public life. This is a dramatic departure from years past, even centuries past, where there has been an acknowledged separation of church and state. However, the Supreme Court’s turn to the right in recent years has resulted in a number of decisions that has eroded this wall of separation.

To begin, the Supreme Court has already decided in a decision that a state requiring the posting of the Ten Commandments in public schools is unconstitutional. In 1980 the Supreme Court decided Stone v. Graham. That case specifically held under the Lemon v. Kurtzman test that Kentucky could not require all of the schools in its state to post the Ten Commandments because the legislature did not put forth a secular legislative purpose. While having a copy of the Ten Commandments on the wall was not used to indoctrinate or instruct children, the Court held their presence on the wall was an endorsement of religion and therefore unconstitutional under the First Amendment since Kentucky made the presence of the Commandments on the classroom wall mandatory.

If the issue has already been decided unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, why did Louisiana introduce a bill to do exactly what the Supreme Court already said was prohibited?

Religious conservatives, evangelicals and right wing religious figures have been quietly working to try and introduce more religion, specifically Christianity, into civic public life. Their efforts got a tremendous boost with the election of Donald J. Trump to the presidency in 2016 and his selection of three Supreme Court justices during his one term. His appointments to the Court shifted a previous 5-4 liberal majority into a 6-3 conservative majority that is more accommodating to religious positions. With this shift, the Supreme Court has been able to issue decisions that have made it easier for religious groups to sidestep the premise of a separation of church and state. Now taxes can be used for private religious schools, religion can be invoked to discriminate against LGBQT+ persons and employees of the state can now demonstrate their faith in a more public manner even when they are publically representing their state sanctioned workplace. These current positions would likely have never been allowed had the Court not changed to a more ideologically conservative court.

The situation in Louisiana is part of this larger trend but also hints at what the legislators behind the bill might want long – term. The legislators likely knew that their bill was unconstitutional. But by passing the bill, they were probably thinking that if the bill is challenged then they could bring the battle to the appeals process and eventually the Supreme Court a few years down the road. If the composition of the Court holds for the next few years, then these legislators will likely see an appeal that will be heard by a Court that is sympathetic to their cause. And once before the Court, they will then have an opportunity to ask for a reversal of the 1980 Stone v. Graham decision. And based on what has happened in recent years, it is not a stretch to think that the high court will overturn the rule prohibiting the mandatory display of the Ten Commandments in all public schools. The danger is not only to our secular Constitution but to non – Christian students – Jewish, Muslim, or no – faith – who face the prospect of attending classes where they could feel excluded because a state legislature has decided that the Christian faith is the preferred faith. Ordinary people would no longer have their religious beliefs chosen for them but by a state legislature which is likely what the Founding Fathers did not want for this country. This is a dangerous road for our country to be going down. LEARN MORE

Engagement Resources

  • The Hill – newsgroup article explaining the many versions of the Ten Commandments and why there will be difficulty and discord when choosing which version to display.
  • Justia – legal website with text of 1980 Supreme Court decision Stone v. Graham.

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!

Tackling the Thirst: Water Scarcity and the Rise of Innovative Conservation Technologies

Tackling the Thirst: Water Scarcity and the Rise of Innovative Conservation Technologies

Tackling the Thirst: Water Scarcity and the Rise of Innovative Conservation Technologies

Environment Policy Brief #169 | By: Inijah Quadri | June 03, 2024
Featured Photo: www.knowesg.com

__________________________________

Water scarcity has become a critical global issue that impacts over 2 billion people, living primarily in regions plagued by drought, land overuse, and pollution. The United Nations projects that, by 2025, 1.8 billion people will be living in regions with absolute water scarcity, and two-thirds of the world could be under stress conditions due to water shortages. This growing crisis is compounded by the dual challenges of climate change and rapid population growth, which strain the limited freshwater supplies crucial for hygiene, health, agriculture, and industry.

In response to these daunting challenges, innovative water conservation technologies are being developed and deployed worldwide. These advancements include precision agriculture, smart water management systems, and revolutionary water purification techniques. Such technologies not only aim to reduce water usage but also improve the management and distribution of this scarce resource, offering sustainable solutions to a global problem.

Analysis

The underlying causes of water scarcity include natural variability in precipitation and human impacts such as water mismanagement, over-extraction for agriculture, and pollution. Inefficient water usage in agriculture, which consumes approximately 70% of global freshwater, exacerbates the problem. Traditional irrigation systems, which are prevalent in developing economies, can have efficiencies as low as 35%, meaning that over half the water used often does not benefit plants directly.

Technological innovations are addressing these inefficiencies in transformative ways. For example, precision agriculture technologies utilize GPS and IoT sensors to tailor water and nutrient delivery to the specific needs of each plant, significantly reducing waste. Israel, a leader in this technology, has implemented drip irrigation systems that can increase water efficiency by up to 90%. These systems deliver water directly to the plant roots, dramatically reducing evaporation and runoff.

Greywater recycling and rainwater harvesting are other pivotal technologies that improve water availability in urban areas. Cities like San Francisco have adopted municipal codes that require all new, large buildings to include greywater systems for non-potable uses such as toilet flushing and landscaping.

Additionally, AI-powered smart water management systems are being utilized in cities to optimize water distribution and reduce leakage. These systems use predictive analytics to manage everything from reservoir levels to pipe pressures, minimizing losses and ensuring efficient use of resources. An example of this is in Singapore, where the Public Utilities Board uses smart systems to monitor and adjust its water network in real time.

Policy Recommendations

To combat water scarcity effectively, governments and stakeholders must prioritize the integration of advanced water technologies through robust policy frameworks and substantial investments. Policies should focus on:

  1. Funding Research and Development: Increase funding for research into new water-saving technologies and methods. Government grants can incentivize innovation and lower the financial risks for companies developing new technologies.
  2. Encouraging Adoption through Incentives: Provide tax breaks, subsidies, and rebates to encourage industries and municipalities to adopt efficient water technologies.
  3. Regulating Water Use: Implement stricter regulations on water usage in agriculture and industry to push the adoption of more efficient systems.
  4. Educational Campaigns: Promote water conservation awareness through educational programs that inform the public about the importance of water conservation and how they can contribute.

By leveraging these resources and adopting forward-thinking policies, stakeholders worldwide can address the pressing issue of water scarcity, ensuring a sustainable and water-secure future for all.

Engagement Resources:
  • Water.org (https://www.water.org/): Advocates for sustainable water solutions in developing regions, providing innovative financial products to enable water and sanitation projects.
  • Alliance for Water Efficiency (https://www.allianceforwaterefficiency.org/): Offers resources and guidance on water conservation measures and technologies, advocating for policies that support efficient water use.
  • Water Footprint Network (https://www.waterfootprint.org/): Provides detailed insights and tools for assessing and managing water use at both the corporate and individual levels.
  • Global Water Partnership (https://www.gwp.org/): A vast network supporting water resource management policies worldwide, promoting sustainable water use practices.
  • International Water Management Institute (https://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/): Focuses on research for better water management practices in developing countries, highlighting sustainable solutions to tackle water scarcity.

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. 

Will Artificial Intelligence Save California… or Ruin It?

Will Artificial Intelligence Save California… or Ruin It?

Will Artificial Intelligence Save California… or Ruin It?

Technology Policy Brief #111 | By: Mindy Spatt | June 07, 2024
Featured Photo by Indy Silva for U.S. Resist News, 2024

__________________________________

While some are looking to the Artificial Intelligence (AI) industry to revive  California’s faltering tech sector, especially in San Francisco, city Supervisor Dean Preston is worried about its impact on elections.  He held a hearing recently during which he found out that the San Francisco Department of elections has no jurisdiction whatsoever over deep fakes.

“I am alarmed to learn …. there is a lack of real ability to enforce against fake AI content,” Preston, said.  He comes by his concerns honestly.  An online news  outlet, BHH News, posted a false report last year saying Preston had resigned due to attacks on him by Elon Musk.  The story was reposted by MSN before Preston’s office was able to get it removed.  The real story is that Musk, owner of San Francisco based X, disagrees with Preston, a democratic socialist, on key issues and hence is going after him.

Concerns over election misinformation are not new, but are growing along with the explosive growth of the industry; Chat GPT acquired a million users just five days after it was founded in November 2022.  By January 2023 it had a million additional users, and it is now up to over 180.5 million users.  In a newly released poll, the advocacy group Free Press found that 79 percent of people worry that information they find online is “false, fake, or a deliberate attempt to confuse.”

Analysis

While the San Francisco Department of Elections may be unable to act, the California Legislature certainly has the ability to do so.  California has been a leader in privacy, and could become one in AI if a set of bills before the legislature this year passes.  But the bills will have to get past a wealthy and well-connected lobbying effort from an industry that always fights tooth and nail against any oversight.

One major area of contention is large language models (LLM), a type of artificial intelligence program that can recognize and generate text and is  trained on huge sets of data.  California’s proposed Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act would establish safeguards before models LLMs could be used, and require reporting of safety incidents.  The dangers include arbitrary code execution, data poisoning, data drift, bias predictions and toxic output and the impacts can be biased algorithms, misinformation and even the creation of lethal weapons.

The California Chamber of Commerce leads a coalition of industry groups hostile to the bill and sent an opposition letter including this choice bit of doublespeak:

This, unfortunately, does not better protect Californians. Instead, by hamstringing businesses from developing the very AI technologies that could protect them from dangerous models developed in territories beyond California’s control, it risks only making them more vulnerable.

Another effort moving forward is the California AI Transparency Act, (CAITA), a bill that requires providers of large generative artificial intelligence systems to label AI-generated images, videos, and audio with embedded disclosures. It also requires a detection tool for users to determine whether content was created by AI.   The author, State Senator Josh Becker (D-Menlo Park) said “AI-generated images, audio and video could be used for spreading political misinformation and creating deep fakes.  CAITA will advance provenance, transparency, accountability, and empower individuals to make choices aligned with their values.”

Other bills under consideration include California Assembly Bill 2930 which would place limitations on the use of automated decision-making tools.  Assemblywoman Buffy Wicks, an east bay democrat, has authored a bill to compel online platforms to add watermarks to images and videos before elections this fall.  And California Senate Bill 893 would create an Artificial Intelligence Research Hub to “facilitate collaboration” and identify risks from AI in both government and the private sector.

Taken together the bills would provide the most robust legislative framework in the country for AI oversight.  That is if they are passed and signed, a scenario Governor Newsom recently cast doubt on.  “We dominate in this space. I want to continue to dominate in this space. I don’t want to cede this space to other states or other countries,” he recently said during an AI summit in San Francisco.   “If we over-regulate, if we overindulge, if we chase a shiny object we could put ourselves in a perilous position.”

But Supervisor Preston may take heart in Newsom’s indication that he’s in favor of laws to prevent election misinformation and deceptive content, because “I’ve got personal reasons to believe that’s legit — the voice, videos, these AI bots, the persuasion campaigns.”  In order to have an impact on November’s election, legislation would have to be approved on an urgency basis which requires a two-thirds vote in both the Assembly and Senate.

Engagement Resources:

Check out UsRenewNews.org/AI  for more news on Artificial Intelligence policies, technologies, and trends.

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 Week That Was: Global News In Review

The Week That Was: Global News In Review

The Week That Was: Global News In Review

Foreign Policy Brief #144 | By: Ibrahim Castro| June 06, 2024
Featured Photo: www.vecteezy.com

__________________________________

Global News in Review 06/07/2024

Members of the Texas National Guard stand near a razor wire fence used to prevent migrants from crossing into the United States from Mexico along the Rio Bravo river, January 22, 2024
[File: Jose Luis Gonzalez/Reuters]


Biden’s asylum ban

The Biden administration has recently instituted a broad asylum ban on migrants caught crossing the US-Mexico border. Migrants caught crossing illegally can now be quickly denied asylum claims and deported or turned back to Mexico under the measure. The US Department of Homeland Security has said there will be exceptions for unaccompanied children, people who face serious medical or safety threats and victims of trafficking. Biden has shifted his approach to border security further to the right as immigration has again emerged as a top issue for Americans in the run-up to the US Presidential elections where he will once again face Donald Trump.

The measure will prevent any migrants who cross the southern border without authorization from applying for asylum if the average number of unauthorized daily crossings passes 2,500. Last month the average number of unauthorized daily crossings reported by the US Border Patrol was 3,700. The new regulations are said to remain in place until the number of unauthorized crossings drops below a daily average of 1,500. With the restrictions to be reimposed whenever numbers increase again. Still, operational questions about the measure’s implementation remain unclear, including how the administration would quickly deport migrants from far-away countries and how many non-Mexican migrants Mexico would be willing to accept under the new enforcement policy.

 

ForeignPolicy143 Pic2

The location of burial sites identified on satellite imagery close to the Al Raqw migrant camp. Photograph: Maxar/HRW


Saudi Arabia: Mass Killings of Migrants

According to a new report by Human Rights Watch, titled: They Fired on us Like Rain, details Saudi border guards who are claimed to have killed hundreds of mainly Ethiopian migrants and asylum seekers, who made their way across the Yemen-Saudi border between March 2022 and June 2023.  Approximately 750,000 Ethiopians reside and work in Saudi Arabia. While many migrate for economic reasons, a large number have fled because of human rights abuses and armed conflict in Ethiopia. The report stated that a UN backed investigation should be launched and “if committed as part of a Saudi government policy to murder migrants, these killings, which appear to continue, would be a crime against humanity”.

 

 

ForeignPolicy143 Pic3

Garry Conille addresses the audience during a ceremony with members of the transition council, where he is presented as Haiti’s interim Prime Minister, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti June 3, 2024. REUTERS/Ralph Tedy Ero


Situation in Haiti 

Haiti’s new interim Prime Minister Garry Conille stated that the new administration and other leaders in the country were setting aside their differences to work for the good of the country, which is battling a devastating crisis fuelled by gang wars. According to Unicef, as many as 4.4 million people in the country are in urgent need of food assistance, and 1.6 million people face emergency levels of acute food insecurity and malnutrition. A Kenya-led mission to help Haitian police and security forces combat the gangs is expected to arrive in the Caribbean nation in the coming weeks. The mission has been supported by the US, which will not be sending troops but will be providing logistical support to the mission, including intelligence sharing, communications, and air power.

 

 


Riots in New Caledonia

Mass protests erupted in New Caledonia after France’s parliament voted to implement electoral reforms that would allow French residents who have lived in the Pacific Islands territory for 10 years or more to vote in provincial elections. The Islands Indigenous Kanak community, who make up 40% of the islands’ population, fear these reforms will undermine their efforts to win independence from France. The French government imposed a strict crackdown on the protests, deploying troops to New Caledonia’s ports and international airport, with hundreds of heavily armed French marines and police patrolling the capital, Noumea. The government also temporarily banned TikTok, and placed those it accused of organizing the protests under house arrest.

At least seven people were killed in the latest civil unrest, with barricades erected across major roads and commercial sites looted and set on fire. New Caledonia has been a French territory since colonization in the late 1800s. Politics remains dominated by debate about whether the islands should be part of France, autonomous or independent, with opinions split roughly along ethnic lines.

For more updates, articles, in-depth analysis and weekly reviews on Global News, click here.

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 Effect of Unpaid Student Loans on the Economy

The Effect of Unpaid Student Loans on the Economy

The Effect of Unpaid Student Loans on the Economy

Education Policy Brief #92 | By: Arvind Salem | June 06, 2024

Featured Photo: www.theweek.com

__________________________________

In March 2020, President Trump signed the CARES Act (Coronavirus Aid Relief and Economic Security). This froze student loan interest, suspended collection efforts for defaulted loans, and paused student loan payment requirements for millions of Americans. The pause was originally designed to end in September 2020.

The repayment pause would be extended twice more by President Trump and another four times by President Biden. Both President Trump and President Biden knew that restarting student loan payments would throw a wet blanket on the sluggish economic recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic. For almost three years, Americans with student loan debt lived in a state of limbo.

Progressives on Biden’s left advocated for broad student loan forgiveness during the 2020 presidential campaign. Senator Elizabeth Warren urged President Biden to cancel $50,000 of student loan debt for each borrower via executive action. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez advocated for higher amounts. For students with six figures of student loan debt, $10,000-$50,000 would not make much of an impact once student loan payments were restarted.

In August 2022, President Biden announced that he was canceling $10,000 of federal student loan debt for households with combined incomes of $250,000 or less, and $20,000 for Pell Grant recipients. Biden announced this measure to coincide with what was to be a final extension of the repayment pause through December 2022. This action was announced under the same authority that granted the Department of Education to alter student loan repayment plans due to the emergency declared as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic.

There was general bipartisan support for using emergency authorization to pause student loan repayments. Both President Trump and President Biden did that multiple times. However, outright forgiveness was a different story, especially in the summer of 2022. By that point, the country was weary of restrictions such as mask mandates and social distancing. With unemployment surging above 10% in many regions, and businesses closing their doors, pausing student loan repayments in 2020 and 2021 made sense. More than two years after the first repayment pause, with the economy recovering, it was harder to justify.

Conservatives seized on Biden’s move and roundly condemned the measure as elitist and extravagant. Why should plumbers and farmers with high school diplomas be asked to pay the bills of wealthy liberals with art history degrees? Moderate Democrats also spoke out against the measure. Joe Manchin, a Democratic senator from West Virginia, called the plan reckless and noted that it was projected to add $400 billion to the U.S. federal debt.

President Biden and his allies in Congress tried to paint Republicans as hypocrites for accepting federal debt relief for their businesses due to the Covid-19 pandemic, while simultaneously criticizing students for accepting much lower amounts of loan forgiveness. $10,000 was a drop in the bucket next to the hundreds of thousands of relief that Republicans such as Marjorie Taylor-Greene and Mike Kelly received.

While this allowed Biden to score some political points, his legal arguments were much weaker.  Biden declared an end to the Covid-19 public health emergency in April 2023. Shortly thereafter, in a 6-3 ruling in the Biden v Nebraska case, the Supreme Court struck down Biden’s student loan forgiveness proposal. Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the majority, noted that President Biden overstepped his authority in using emergency powers to permanently cancel student loan debt. This was especially evident after President Biden declared an end to the public health emergency he was using as justification for the proposal.

Analysis

I am the head coach of a high school debate team. Through a random draw, we received the assignment of arguing against federal student loan forgiveness. We won that round handily.

The opposition argument is the better argument. As Senator Manchin noted, there are numerous existing pathways to federal student loan forgiveness. The Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program forgives student loans after ten years of working for a federal, state, or local non-profit organization. Graduates with advanced degrees can often earn high salaries in the private sector. The PSLF program provides incentive for these graduates to pledge a decade of their lives in service to their communities. The country needs high-quality teachers, police officers, and nurses. The PSLF program, combined with income-based repayment plans that cap payments at a low percentage of take-home pay, provides affordable pathways for graduates to escape crippling debt.

President Biden and Senator Warren are absolutely right to note that student loan debt places a heavy burden on millions of Americans. I am one of them. I had $138,000 in student loan debt when I graduated from the University of Pittsburgh with my doctorate.

I am well on my way to student loan forgiveness through the PSLF program and have knocked over $50,000 off of my loan totals. My ten years will be up before my loans are repaid. I believe a decade of public service is a much more convincing rationale for loan forgiveness than the mass loan cancellation plan originally proposed by President Biden.

It seems that President Biden has also come to this realization. A month ago, the Biden Administration issued a press release detailing plans for expanding student loan forgiveness through PSLF and keeping monthly payments low through income-based repayment plans. The Biden Administration has also been active in canceling or reducing the debt of graduates from predatory for-profit institutions which took students’ money and then either closed outright or issued degrees which were not worth the paper they were printed on.

These arguments are much more potent than blanket student loan forgiveness. The Democratic Party built its brand as a defender of working Americans in the face of corporate greed. President Clinton forged a coalition of nurses and teachers that helped him achieve victory in the 1992 and 1996 elections. Giving wealthy college graduates loan forgiveness and asking all taxpayers to pay for it goes against every principle that built the modern Democratic Party. It provides free fuel to the silly argument of the MAGA movement which aims to portray Democrats as elitists and President Trump, with his golden toilets and multiple bankruptcies, as a champion of the working man.

Proposing broad student loan forgiveness was a political blunder. President Biden should continue to hammer Republicans for accepting loan relief from the federal government while refusing graduates the right to accept similar debt forgiveness. However, public servants present a much better contrast to those Republicans than wealthy college graduates getting a free $10,000 check.

President Biden’s 2024 campaign should look to President Clinton’s 1992 campaign for inspiration. American voters have much more respect for nurses, teachers, firefighters, and police officers than the entitled students who demanded food delivery after vandalizing and occupying campus buildings.

PSLF is good for the country and for graduates seeking relief. The path to victory runs through the political center. If President Biden attempts to appease the political left at the expense of the traditional Clinton coalition of nurses and teachers, he will soon join President Carter as a one-term President.

Engagement Resources

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!

Navigating Inflation: A Comprehensive Analysis

Navigating Inflation: A Comprehensive Analysis

Navigating Inflation: A Comprehensive Analysis

Economic Policy Brief #61 | By: Arvind Salem| June 06, 2024

Featured Photo: www.techopedia.com

__________________________________

As people clamor for the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates, the Fed stands firm: mainly due to inflationary pressure. From April 2023 to April 2024, the inflation rate was 3.4%, compared to the average of 2.5% from 1989 to 2019. For the average consumer, prices rose 19.32% between January 2020 and April 2024, particularly in the housing market and the grocery store. Rent and homeownership, along with hotel prices, accounted for two-thirds of the annual rise in “core” inflation, which excludes the more volatile components of inflation such as food and energy. Especially leading up to the election where 75% of Americans say strengthening the economy is their top priority and 72% of adults are very concerned about the price of food and consumer goods.

President Trump is attempting to pin the blame on President Biden, who is arguing that he has actually been vigorously fighting inflation. Biden has pointed to his signature achievement: the Inflation Reduction Act, which was enacted in August of 2022. However, even as Biden admits, the Inflation Reduction Act hasn’t lowered prices in the short term: but is supposed to address structural problems to lower prices in the long run. For example, through tax credits for renewable energy, the Inflation Reduction act is projected to cut electricity rates by as much as 9 percent  and lower gas prices by as much as 13 percent through electric vehicle tax credits.

Analysis:

The approaches to combating inflation differ greatly on both sides of the ideological spectrum. Conservatives, unsurprisingly, favor supply-side methods. The Joint Economic Committee of Republicans favors a prescription of lowering government spending (which they perceive as a driver of inflation), coupled with structural fixes including occupational licensing reform, deregulating  energy and housing, and restoring free trade through the repeal of regulatory barriers and tariffs like the Jones Act and Foreign Dredge Act.

However, all of these prescriptions lower costs, with the assumption that those lower costs would get passed on to consumers as lower prices, thus lowering inflation. Yet, the Progressive Caucus rightly points out that many savings don’t get passed onto consumers but get absorbed as corporate profits. Since the Great Recession, companies enjoyed a 25 percent bump in year-over-year corporate profits, while real wages barely changed. This shows that profits are independent of costs, so the lasting solution will be to regulate profit, rather than helping to lower costs. Additionally, Progressives rightly favor allowing the federal government to negotiate prices with Medicare, which Biden has already begun to do.

The 2024 Presidential Election will largely be a battle on the economy, an area where Biden is winning both in terms of messaging and policy, and an area that Biden should continue to emphasize to draw attention away from his key weaknesses on his age and foreign policy.

Engagement Resources:
  • Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget is a nonpartisan, non-profit organization committed to educating the public on issues with significant fiscal policy impact. Readers that agree with supply-side attitudes and fiscal responsibility may be interested in this organization.
  • Roosevelt Institute, The Roosevelt Institute is a progressive think tank that supports progressive policies and analysis on a variety of economic problems, including inflation. Readers interested in exploring the progressive perspective on this issue more may be interested in this organization.

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!

History of the Upside Down Flag and the Justice Alito Controversy

History of the Upside Down Flag and the Justice Alito Controversy

History of the Upside Down Flag and the Justice Alito Controversy

Civil Rights Policy Brief #224 | By: Rod Maggay | May 28, 2024

Featured Photo by Indy Silva for U.S. Resist News, 2024

__________________________________

Policy Summary: On May 16, 2024 an article in the New York Times by investigative reporter Jodi Kantor reported that an American flag was seen flying upside down outside Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s home. While the New York Times report was published in 2024, the incident occurred in January 2021 after the January 6th insurrection at the U.S. Capitol. On May 22, 2024 a second article was published by the New York Times which reported that the Pine Tree Flag was seen flying outside another home owned by Justice Alito. The Pine Tree Flag is a white flag with a green pine tree on it with the words “An Appeal To Heaven” above the picture of the pine tree. The Pine Tree Flag has recently been adopted by Christian Nationalists, far-right extremist groups and supporters of Donald Trump who believe the false claim that the 2020 election was stolen from the former President.

On November 13, 2023, the United States Supreme Court issued a Code of Conduct for Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. Canon 3 of the Code is titled “A Justice Should Perform The Duties of the Office Fairly, Impartially, and Diligently” and under the Disqualification Section of Section B(2) of the Canon it states, “A Justice should disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the Justice’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” The Code of Conduct is not enforceable on the Justices and merely acts as guidelines for what Justice should do if they decide to follow it. LEARN MORE

Policy Analysis: The controversy over the multiple flags seen flying at two of Justice Sam Alito’s residential properties calls into question the Justice’s ability to be impartial. That in turn is directly related to Canon 3, Section B(2) of the Supreme Court’s recently adopted Code of Conduct because it shows that the Justice is publicly taking a side on a political issue. Namely, that he supports the January 6th rioters and their efforts to thwart the legitimate results of the 2020 election.

Flying the American flag upside down has a long history going back centuries. It was originally used by sailors who were experiencing difficulties at sea. They would fly the American flag upside down as a signal that they needed immediate assistance. The flag has also been flown upside down to protest slavery and in modern times to protest the Vietnam War. And when the flag has appeared on stamps some have placed the stamps upside down on their mailings as a subtle way to express their displeasure with the government. In the 1920’s the United States issued rules regarding the flying, treatment and protocol of the American flag and one section of the rules specifically states that the flag should never be flown upside down, “except as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property.”

But lately, the act of flying the flag upside down has been adopted by Christian Nationalists and far – right extremist groups to protest what they perceive as the United States currently being in distressing and troubling times. While the symbolic act may be to express their support for falsehoods such as the 2020 election being stolen from Donald Trump, Justice Alito’s act is far more troublesome because of his position as a Justice on the Supreme Court. While he is free to have his own personal political opinions, it does not appear that Justice Alito or his family was in “dire distress” or was in a situation that involved “extreme danger to life or property.” For the Justice to claim a neighborhood argument rose to this level was completely unnecessary on his part.

And it was unnecessary because his actions have now raised the possibility that the Justice cannot be impartial if cases are argued before him. Justice Alito had a professional obligation to present the appearance of impartiality and that he can be fair when adjudicating a case. That is all thrown out the window now because his act of raising two controversial flags over his property signals that he supports right wing extremist groups and the efforts they are undertaking to currently undermine American democracy. The Justice could have avoided being accused that he is not biased by simply not flying the flag upside down or flying a flag that has become a symbol of the Christian Nationalist movement.

So, what’s next in this unfortunate incident? Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois has called on Justice Alito to recuse himself from cases related to the 2020 election that might come before the Supreme Court while also demanding the Supreme Court adopt an enforceable code of conduct. Additionally, the non – profit group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) sent a letter to Chief Justice John Roberts asking him to intervene and persuade Justice Alito to disqualify himself. And another option, one that seems more likely, comes from Representative Steve Cohen of Tennessee. He is going to introduce a resolution censuring Justice Alito. The resolution would be a public reprimand of the Justice in order for Congress to express their disapproval of the Justice and his acts regarding the two flags that now raises questions about his ability to be impartial. This might be the more feasible option as it seems highly unlikely that the Chief Justice will force Justice Alito be disqualified from cases or that Justice Alito will recuse himself. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE

Engagement Resources

This brief was compiled by Rod Maggay. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief, please contact 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!

x
x
Support fearless journalism! Your contribution, big or small, dismantles corruption and sparks meaningful change. As an independent outlet, we rely on readers like you to champion the cause of transparent and accountable governance. Every donation fuels our mission for insightful policy reporting, a cornerstone for informed citizenship. Help safeguard democracy from tyrants—donate today. Your generosity fosters hope for a just and equitable society.

Pin It on Pinterest