JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
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.
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.
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.
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
- ‘Crypto industry’s lobbying drive will pay off in US elections, Ripple president says‘ by Elizabeth Howcroft and Hannah Lang, June 4, 202410:59 PM, https://www.reuters.com/technology/crypto-industrys-lobbying-drive-will-pay-off-us-elections-ripple-president-says-2024-06-04/
- ‘Massive inflatable ‘Trump Chicken’ is back in the S.F. Bay Area’ by Michael Cabanatuan, June 6, 2024, https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/inflatable-trump-chicken-is-back-in-sf-bay-19496963.php
- ‘Here’s the list of Trump supporters who went to his fancy Pac Heights fundraiser‘ by TIM REDMOND, June 10, 2024, https://48hills.org/2024/06/heres-the-list-of-trumps-sf-supporters/
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
“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
- U.S. Mission to the OSCE (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe): Join Statement on the Second Anniversary of the Arrest of Vladimir Kara-Murza, https://osce.usmission.gov/joint-statetment-on-the-second-anniversary-of-the-arrest-of-vladimir-kara-murza/
- U.S. Embassy and Consulates in Russia: Marking 2 Years of Vladimir Kara-Murza’s Unjust Detention, https://ru.usembassy.gov/marking-two-years-of-vladimir-kara-murzas-unjust-detention/
- Human Rights First: Free Vladimir Kara-Murza, https://humanrightsfirst.org/free-kara-murza/
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
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.