JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
The Perilous Reality of Palestinian Villages in the West Bank
Brief #137 – Foreign Policy Brief
by: Aziza Taslaq
In the volatile landscape of the West Bank, Palestinian villages endure relentless assaults orchestrated by Israeli settlers, evoking harrowing echoes of historical atrocities. As communities grapple with ongoing conflict and profound tragedy, the imperative for justice and resolution looms urgently, underscoring the pressing need to address the plight of the Palestinian people.
Evan Gershkovich’s Story
Brief #136 – Foreign Policy Brief
by: Yelena Korshunov
In the gripping account of Evan Gershkovich’s ordeal, the Wall Street Journal journalist finds himself at the center of a geopolitical standoff as he languishes in a Russian prison on charges of espionage. With international pressure mounting and negotiations underway, his story epitomizes the challenges faced by journalists navigating the complex landscape of modern geopolitics.
‘BURN BOOK’ Review: Kara Swisher’s Memoir Covering the Tech Industry and the Billionaires It Made
Brief #110 – Technology Policy Brief
by : Mindy Spatt
In Kara Swisher’s memoir “Burn Book,” she delves into the glamorous yet contentious world of the tech industry, offering insights into the lives of influential figures like Elon Musk and Steve Jobs. Swisher’s narrative navigates the intersection of power, wealth, and influence, shedding light on the untold stories behind Silicon Valley’s rise to prominence.
An Unconstitutional and Dangerous State Trend: Chaplains as School Counselors
Brief #223 – Civil Rights Policy Brief
by: Rodney A. Maggay
As state legislatures across the nation flirt with the dangerous notion of substituting unqualified chaplains for trained school counselors, the fundamental principle of separation between church and state is under dire threat. By permitting unlicensed individuals to wield influence over vulnerable students’ mental health and social well-being, these policies jeopardize not only constitutional freedoms but also the safety and welfare of countless students.
Former President Trump’s Criminal Court Cases: Taking Stock
Brief #127 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by: Courtney Denning
In the midst of ongoing legal battles, former President Donald J. Trump faces a series of high-profile civil and criminal court cases, ranging from civil to criminal charges across multiple states. As these trials unfold, they hold significant implications for both Trump’s political future and the broader landscape of American jurisprudence.
With thousands of jobs promised, $6 billion in ‘green’ industry funding was an easy sell: The Pros and Cons of New Government-Sponsored Green Jobs
Brief #166 – Environment Policy Brief
by : Todd Broadman
Amidst bipartisan support, the Biden administration allocates $6 billion towards green jobs, targeting the decarbonization of heavy industries like steel and aluminum. This initiative aims to create employment opportunities while advancing environmental goals, sparking debates on its effectiveness and economic viability.
Cryptocurrencies: Economic Implications and Challenges
Brief #60 – Economic Policy Brief
by: Inijah Quadri
The rise of cryptocurrencies heralds a new era in the global financial landscape, offering decentralized alternatives to traditional fiat currencies. With the potential for enhanced financial inclusion and transactional efficiency, cryptocurrencies present both opportunities and challenges in reshaping the future of finance.
Rahma’s Journey: Navigating Pregnancy Amidst Hardship in Gaza
Brief #135 – Foreign Policy Brief
by: Aziza Taslaq
“Rahma’s Journey” sheds light on the harrowing and courageous journey of Rahma, a soon-to-be mother facing insurmountable challenges amidst the turmoil of war-torn Gaza. Rahma’s resilience amidst scarcity, fear, and uncertainty highlights the stark reality for all women and mothers-to-be in this conflict-ridden region.
Is Judge Cannon Tilting The Classified Documents Case In Trump’s Favor?
Brief #222 – Civil Rights Policy Brief
by Rodney A. Maggay
In a controversial turn of events, Judge Aileen Cannon’s handling of cases involving former President Trump is under scrutiny, with accusations of favoritism towards Trump. Allegations point to questionable orders and scheduling delays, raising concerns that Judge Cannon may be intentionally tilting the trial in Trump’s favor, prompting widespread debate on the integrity of the judicial process.
Congress Struggles to Regulate Social Media Content
Congress Struggles to Regulate Social Media Content
Technology Policy Brief #108 | By: Mindy Spatt | March 05, 2024
Featured Photo taken from: www.san.com
__________________________________
A Senate Committee grabbed major media headlines for making Mark Zuckerberg say “sorry” to the parents of children harmed by social media, but his highly publicized apology drew derision from commentators and comedians as a meaningless show put on by a Congress that has been unable to pass significant legislation to address the harms of social media. State Attorney Generals and legislators have been far more aggressive, and more successful, but a pending Supreme Court decision could dramatically change the landscape.
Analysis
Zuckerberg’s performance was mocked by commentators and talk show hosts, including Jimmy Kimmel, who said Zuckerberg’s apology had “the level of sincerity you can usually only get on ChatGPT.” Bills in languishing in Congress include a privacy rights one requiring online platforms to disclose how a users’ personal data will be collected and used, a proposal for a Digital Consumer Protection Commission and the Kids Online Safety Act. (KOSA)
Zuckerberg was one of a mostly united group of social media CEOs who oppose those bills, as they do pretty much any government regulation or oversight over their operations. Except for Evan Spiegel, the CEO of Snapchat, who broke with the group by throwing his company’s support behind KOSA, which would make platforms like Snapchat liable for exposing minors to harmful content. He urged Zuckerberg and the others to do the same.
Some senators appeared clueless. Kimmel caught an especially strange moment from the hearing, with Louisiana Senator John Kennedy calling out Spiegel, saying “I see you hiding down there.” Kennedy then asked Spiegel “What does yadda yadda yadda mean?” Spiegel replied, “I’m not familiar with the term senator,” to which the Senator reacted to with the comment “very uncool.”
While Congress pussyfoots around, there’s action and reaction at the state level, and at the United States Supreme Court. Thirty-three states filed suit in federal court in California in October 2023, claiming that Meta is violating laws forbidding the company from collecting data on children under 13 without their parents’ consent. They also allege the company has deliberately designed their products to be addictive to children.
Last year, Utah passed legislation requiring social media companies to obtain parental consent for minors, verify the ages of their subscribers in Utah and execute a digital curfew on minors. It is set to take effect next year, although it is unclear how the rules would be enforced, or if the law would survive a challenge. A similar law was approved in Arkansas but was struck down in court. And the same arguments being made by the companies in these battles were made in a high-profile case heard at the US Supreme Court on Feb. 26.
Texas and Florida have passed laws to stop what they term as “censoring” by social media companies that have blocked Donald Trump and other extremists on their platforms. They claim the companies should be treated as businesses that don’t have the right to reject customers they disagree with. The companies argue that they should be treated as news outlets and have editorial discretion over what they publish, the same argument they make against state efforts to regulate them.
This same editorial discretion that conservatives object to has allowed the companies to censor content from a variety of sources, including Palestine (see Brief # 102 ), and, some would allege, allowed sexual exploitation and child pornography to proliferate. The first amendment issues will be thorny for the Court to resolve.
Engagement Resources
- Five Takeaways From The Times’s Investigation Into Child Influencers, By Jennifer Valentino-DeVries and Michael H. Keller, Feb. 22, 2024
- 2024 Set To Be Crucial Year For Child Online Safety Litigation, By Gabby Miller, Dec. 18, 2023.
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.
Checking in on 14 Years of Obamacare: Part 1
Checking in on 14 Years of Obamacare: Part 1
Health and Gender Policy Brief #170 | By: Geoffrey Small | March 05, 2024
Featured Photo: www.cosmopolitan.com
__________________________________
March 2024 highlights fourteen years since the The ACA (Affordable Care Act) has been enacted. When it was passed more than a decade ago, there were three primary goals of the ACA, or more popularly referred to as Obamacare. According to HealthCare.gov, the first was to make affordable health insurance more available for the American public. The second goal was to encourage states to expand their Medicaid coverage to all individuals whose income is significantly below the federal poverty level. Finally, the ACA would provide federal support to “innovative medical care delivery methods designed to lower the costs of health care generally.” Considering the fact that this landmark legislation, the most significant policy change since the introduction of Medicare in 1965, is categorized into three broad regulatory goals, this policy analysis series will break down each goal to understand the progress of this healthcare reform. The first in this series will expand on the data that indicates how the ACA has made healthcare more affordable and available overall.
Policy Analysis
To measure ACA affordability, factors such as inflation, the COVID-19 pandemic, fluctuating state Medicaid coverage, and the growing rate of insured individuals play a major role when strictly looking at premiums. According to the Peterson Center on Healthcare and the Kaiser Family Foundation, there will be a projected 2-10% increase in 2024 ACA premiums. One can only imagine the increases in cost if Obamacare wasn’t enacted, but premiums are a significant variable that directly impacts an insured individual’s ability to afford coverage. However, this metric alone is reductive when viewed through the comprehensive lens of affordable healthcare overall.
Accessibility also provides insight into affordability. And according to multiple HHS (Health and Human Services) studies, accessibility to healthcare coverage is improving because of the ACA. In 2022, HHS stated that the national uninsured rate is at an all time low, due to ACA policy changes. The Office of Health Policy stated “Changes in uninsured rates from 2020 to 2022 were largest among individuals with incomes below 100% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) and incomes between 200% and 400% FPL.”
Accessibility across racial and ethnic backgrounds has also improved because of Obamacare. Despite these positive trends, minorities still have significantly higher uninsured rates than whites.
A separate HHS study concluded that before the ACA was administered, “individuals who identified as Hispanic or Latino had the second highest rate of uninsured individuals, with 32 percent in 2010. From 2010 to 2019, the rate of uninsured Hispanic individuals decreased by nearly one third, but at 22 percent in 2019 it is still almost 2.5 times the rate for white individuals (whose uninsured percentage dropped from 14 to 9).” Native Americans also experienced the most dramatic decrease in uninsured adults.
A Health Affairs research article has also stated that the LGBTQ community has seen improvement in overall accessibility thanks to the ACA. The research indicated that adult LGBT coverage increased from 75.9% in 2013 to 91% in 2019.
The Affordable Care Act is considered a massive overhaul of our healthcare system. A 14-year debate has since ensued between scholars, policymakers, and the mainstream media related to the three primary goals. Within each goal lies nuanced data detailing the progress our society has made since the law was passed. One simply can’t determine that a rise in healthcare premiums dictates affordability. Progress is being made in overall accessibility, but inequalities among the uninsured still remain.
This is the first part in a series. For the rest of the Obamacare series, click here.
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.
Addressing the Modern Refugee Crisis in the US: Policies and Solutions
Addressing the Modern Refugee Crisis in the US: Policies and Solutions
Social Justice Policy Brief #157 | By: Inijah Quadri| February 23, 2024
Featured Photo taken from: www.immigrationimpact.com
__________________________________
The United States has long been a beacon of hope for refugees fleeing persecution, war, and violence. The modern refugee crisis, characterized by an unprecedented number of displaced individuals globally, presents complex challenges that require nuanced, humane, and effective policy responses.
Before delving into the complexities of the U.S. response to the refugee crisis, it is crucial to clarify the terminology used in this discourse. The term ‘refugees’ refers to individuals who are forced to flee their country due to persecution, war, or violence and have been recognized under international law. ‘Migrants’, on the other hand, can encompass a broader category of people on the move, not necessarily compelled by immediate threats but often seeking better economic opportunities. ‘Asylum seekers’ are individuals who seek international protection from dangers in their home country but whose claim for refugee status has not yet been determined. Each group faces distinct legal and procedural challenges in their quest for safety and stability.
In discussing the modern crisis, it’s essential to recognize the different circumstances under which individuals seek refuge in the U.S. Asylum seekers, for example, are individuals who flee persecution based on race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. On the other hand, some refugees are escaping extreme poverty, though this category often faces more challenges in gaining asylum. Understanding these distinctions is crucial for developing policies that address the specific needs and rights of each group.
This article examines the current state of the overall land border refugee crisis in the U.S., exploring policy challenges and proposing solutions aimed at improving the resettlement process, ensuring fair treatment of asylum seekers, and leveraging international cooperation to address root causes of displacement.
Analysis
The number of forcibly displaced people worldwide reaches new highs every year, with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) reporting millions in need of resettlement. However, the U.S. has seen a fluctuation in its refugee admission caps, with recent years witnessing significant reductions. This trend raises concerns about the nation’s commitment to providing sanctuary for the world’s most vulnerable.
To accurately assess the scale of the refugee crisis and the U.S.’s response, recent data sheds light on the numbers. As of the latest reports, more than a million refugees and migrants enter the United States on an annual basis, with that number rising to well over 1.5 million in 2023 alone. The majority of these individuals come from Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, Cuba, India, Honduras and China, reflecting the global patterns of displacement, persecution and poverty. Of those seeking entry, approximately about 60,000 were accepted for resettlement last year, while the others are turned back, or are simply unnaccounted for. These figures underscore the challenges and limitations of the current U.S. immigration system in addressing the needs of displaced individuals.
One of the critical challenges in addressing the refugee crisis is the lengthy and complex resettlement process. Refugees undergo rigorous security checks and screenings, often taking years before being admitted to the U.S. This delay exacerbates the hardships faced by refugees, leaving them in limbo and uncertain of their futures. Additionally, the treatment of asylum seekers at the U.S. borders has sparked national and international debate.
After examining the treatment of asylum seekers and the controversies surrounding policies like family separation and the Remain in Mexico policy, both enacted during the Trump administration, it’s crucial to consider the broader debate on border control. The argument for closing the border often centers on national security and the management of resources. However, opponents argue that such measures ignore humanitarian obligations and can damage the U.S.’s international reputation. Recently, a bipartisan bill aimed at addressing some of these concerns passed the Senate. This legislation proposed a balanced approach to border security and refugee admissions, reflecting a rare moment of consensus. Unfortunately, it was vetoed in the House, a decision influenced by former President Trump’s advocacy for stricter border controls. Trump’s stance emphasizes the need for more stringent measures to curb illegal immigration, suggesting a fundamental disagreement on the role of the U.S. as a refuge.
Proposed Solutions:
1. Increase Refugee Admission Caps: The U.S. should commit to increasing its refugee admission caps to reflect the scale of the global crisis. A return to historical averages would signal the U.S.’s renewed commitment to refugee protection and resettlement.
2. Streamline the Resettlement Process: Reducing the time it takes for refugees to be resettled requires improving the efficiency of screening processes without compromising security. As we propose increasing refugee admissions and streamlining the resettlement process, it’s important to address the resources required for such efforts. The federal government plays a primary role in funding and coordinating resettlement programs, but state and city governments often bear the brunt of direct support services. This includes housing, education, and healthcare for refugees. The growing number of refugees has put additional pressure on local communities, highlighting the need for a more equitable distribution of resources and responsibilities. Enhanced federal support and clear guidelines can help ensure that refugees are resettled in communities equipped to support them, facilitating better integration and self-reliance. The U.S. government can also invest in technology and increase staffing to process applications more quickly.
3. End Harmful Border Policies: Policies that undermine the rights and dignity of asylum seekers should be revised or ended, including those at the Texas border where Governor Greg Abbott’s controversial measures have sparked debate. The U.S. should ensure that its practices, especially in contentious areas like Texas, align with international law and the principles of humanitarian protection.
4. Support Integration and Self-Reliance: Providing refugees with access to education, employment, and health services upon arrival supports their integration and self-reliance. Programs that facilitate language learning, job training, and community engagement are crucial for successful resettlement. Addressing the U.S. labor market’s needs presents an opportunity to challenge misconceptions about refugees and job competition. Many sectors, including agriculture, healthcare, and technology, face significant labor shortages that refugees can help fill. This contribution not only aids in their integration and self-reliance but also supports the U.S. economy. It’s a common misconception that refugees take jobs from American citizens. In reality, they often take positions that are hard to fill, creating more jobs by stimulating demand and contributing to a diverse workforce. By acknowledging and leveraging this potential, and letting the populace be more aware of this, the U.S. can foster a more inclusive and productive society.
5. International Cooperation: The U.S. must work with international partners to address the root causes of displacement, such as conflict, persecution, and climate change. Investing in development and stabilization efforts in countries of origin can reduce forced displacement over time.
Addressing the modern refugee crisis in the U.S. requires a multifaceted approach that balances security concerns with humanitarian obligations. By increasing refugee admissions, streamlining the resettlement process, ensuring the fair treatment of asylum seekers, and engaging in international efforts to tackle the root causes of displacement, the U.S. can reaffirm its position as a global leader in refugee protection and resettlement.
Engagement Resources
- UNHCR (https://www.unhcr.org/): The UN Refugee Agency provides critical support to refugees globally and advocates for their protection and resettlement.
- International Rescue Committee (https://www.rescue.org/): The IRC responds to the world’s worst humanitarian crises and helps people to survive, recover, and gain control of their future.
- Refugee Council USA (https://rcusa.org/): A coalition of U.S.-based organizations committed to refugee protection, welcome, and excellence in the U.S. refugee resettlement program.
- American Immigration Council (https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/): Works to strengthen America by shaping how America thinks about and acts towards immigrants and immigration.
- Human Rights First (https://www.humanrightsfirst.org/): An independent advocacy and action organization that challenges America to live up to its ideals, including fair treatment of asylum seekers and refugees.
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.
Israel-Gaza War Updates
Israel-Gaza War Updates
Foreign Policy Brief #124 | By: Ibrahim Castro| February 28, 2024
Featured Photo taken from: www.slate.com
__________________________________
Current situation:
Nearly six months have passed since the October 7, 2023 attacks, an Israeli assault on the Gaza strip that has killed over 29,000 people with thousands more believed to be uncounted and buried under rubble in the strip. Despite growing international condemnation and calls for a ceasefire, the war shows no sign of ending, and has driven around 80% of the Palestinians in Gaza from their homes and has left nearly half of the population starving, according to UN officials. The US in recent weeks has been meeting with mediators Egypt and Qatar to try to broker another cease-fire and hostage release agreement. Yet Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has vowed to continue the assault on Gaza until “total victory” is achieved. The unwillingness of the Israeli PM to move towards a negotiated ceasefire has raised fears that Gazans will be forced out of the strip and that troops will soon move and attack the town of Rafah on the Egyptian border, where half of Gaza’s 2.3 million people have sought refuge from the Israeli bombing campaign in the rest of the strip.
International responses to the Israel-Gaza war and humanitarian crisis in Gaza:
As the Israel-Gaza war has dragged on, calls for a ceasefire and humanitarian aid have grown. Last week the Turkish and Egyptian presidents met in Cairo, for the first meeting between these two heads of state in over a decade, during the meeting the two called for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. In the Netherlands a Dutch appeals court ordered the government to stop the delivery of F-35 fighter jet parts to Israel in order to comply with the recent ICJ ruling. In Africa there was unanimous agreement at an African Union summit in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa where the continent’s heads of state condemned Israel’s offensive in Gaza and called for its immediate end and the Israeli Delegation was prevented from entering the union’s headquarters.
Earlier this week Brazilian President Lula Da Silva Lula compared Israel’s war on Gaza to the Nazi’s treatment of Jews in World War II. Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz announced that Lula is not welcome into the country until he takes back his comments. The leaders of Canada, Australia and New Zealand issued a joint statement also calling for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza, the statement came as a response to Israeli attacks and reported plans for a ground invasion on Rafah. The recent ICJ ruling stated that, it was plausible that Israel’s acts could amount to genocide and issued six provisional measures, including that Israel must do all it can to prevent genocide, including refraining from harming or killing Palestinians. At the United Nations, thirteen countries on the 15 member body security council backed an Algerian resolution to call for an immediate ceasefire. Only two states did not vote in favor of the resolution with the UK abstaining, with the US being the sole veto to the resolution.
Violence in the region:
Since the beginning of the war in Gaza there has been a dramatic rise in conflict across the region. States including Israel, the US, and Iran have conducted airstrikes within the borders of other countries. Israel recently launched its longest and heaviest attack on neighboring Lebanon since the start of the Gaza war, striking several locations in the south, killing multiple civilians, and raising further the prospect of full war between the two states. Israel and the Lebanese armed group Hezbollah have traded fire since the beginning of the war, Hezbollah has called for an end to an assault on Gaza in order to end the fighting.
The US has struck sites in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen, the strikes are claimed to have been carried out against Iranian backed groups within those countries. Last month four US personnel suffered traumatic brain injuries after the Ain al-Asad airbase in Iraq was hit by ballistic missiles and rockets allegedly fired by Iranian backed militants. Iran last month also launched missile and drone strikes on targets in three countries Iraq, Syria and Pakistan, angering the targeted countries and killing civilians. All players involved claim to be striking bases of operation for one anothers proxy groups. The overall result of these strikes is that these developments continue to heighten concerns over the possibility of a wider all out Middle East war. This concern has been augmented by missile and drone attacks by the Houthis in Yemen on cargo ships in the Red Sea. The US has responded with air strikes on the Houthis.
For more articles and in-depth analysis on the Israel-Gaza War, 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 Unequal Effects of Climate Change on Vulnerable Communities
The Unequal Effects of Climate Change on Vulnerable Communities
Environment Policy Brief #165 | By: Devyne Byrd | February 27, 2024
Featured Photo sourced from: www.sustainable-earth.org
__________________________________
As the world contends with the negative effects of climate change, lower-income communities are often hit the hardest due to environmental injustice. The intersection of climate change, class, and social factors combine to unequally impact poorer communities and make avoiding natural disasters and recovering from them exceedingly difficult.
A major source of environmental injustice is zoning and land use policies that allow industrial facilities that pollute the air and water to be located in low-income areas. There is a stretch of land between Baton Rouge and New Orleans commonly called Cancer Alley. Local zoning ordinances have encouraged the implementation of factories, refineries, and other industries that heavily pollute natural resources. The local governments also include tax breaks, and subsidies to encourage factory expansion in the area. The residents of the land who are low-income and predominantly Black and Hispanic, bear the brunt of the consequences of these zoning laws, reporting higher cases of asthma and cancer.
The hardships these communities face are a direct result of the discrimination against low-income communities as they take on an unequal share of the consequences of environmental decline. Additionally, although poorer communities account for less global emissions, they are more affected by climate change because they tend to be located in areas that are prone to the extreme weather that climate change causes such as flooding or hurricanes. Because of the land’s susceptibility to natural disasters, it is often cheaper and the only place poorer communities can afford to live. The housing itself is often of lower quality, lacking proper insulation or construction materials that would keep them safe during natural disasters.
Finally, after low-income communities are affected by natural disasters and discriminatory zoning, they then have to contend with decreased access to medical and emergency services. Poorer populations tend to struggle with obtaining health insurance and have fewer healthcare facilities in their vicinity. This makes obtaining assistance prohibitively expensive and often delays seeking medical care which leads to poorer outcomes. In conjunction with climate change exacerbating existing health care inequalities as discussed previously, poorer communities have higher incidences of serious illness and death due to climate disasters.
Poorer communities continue to bear a disproportionate burden of the effects of the worsening climate. Due to their lower income, parties affected by environmental injustice hold less power in the political landscape to advocate for changes or to relocate from hazardous areas. These already vulnerable communities are left to the will of politicians and the wealthy to reduce emissions and not actively put pollutants into their areas. This emphasizes the need for immediate action to alleviate the pressures put on these communities and the lessening of climate change.
Engagement Resources
- Center on Budget and Policy Priorities – An article on proposed solutions to the affordable housing crisis, including rental assistance and the housing supply.
- Poverty and Climate Change – A report on reducing poor community’s vulnerability to climate change through adaptation.
Click here to read more in-depth analysis on Climate Change. 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.
2024: The Year of Elections
2024: The Year of Elections
Foreign Policy Brief #123 | By: Ibrahim Castro| February 26, 2024
Featured Photo taken from: www.ie.edu
__________________________________
The year 2024 will be a record breaking year for elections around the world. More than 50 countries that are home to half the planet’s population are all due to hold their national elections this year. However, just because elections are set to be held is not in and of itself good news. The past few years have seen a strong resurgence of the far-right and authoritarian leaders in numerous countries. In certain countries, voting will be neither free nor fair. In many, bans on opposition candidates, distrustful electorates and the potential for manipulation and disinformation may sway outcomes or enable anti-democratic candidates. This year’s elections will test whether democracy globally will continue its trend of backsliding or whether a renewed push for democratic freedoms will take hold.
Some of the elections already held:
Bangladesh: Elections for the South Asian nation were held on January 7th. Bangladesh, home to 170 million people, was the first country in South Asia this year to head to the polls. But turnout was low, with only 40% of approximately 120 million eligible voters taking part. Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has secured a fourth consecutive term in office. Human rights organizations have warned that Hasina and her government are headed towards a one-party system, as critics expressed concerns over increased reports of political violence and voter intimidation.
El Salvador: On February 4th, El Salvador’s president who calls himself the ‘world’s coolest dictator’ scored the second largest election win in the country’s history. El Salvador’s Nayib Bukele suspended civil liberties to conduct a sweeping crackdown on gang violence which proved popular with voters. Bukele is now El Salvador’s first reelected president. His party’s majority in congress and a court they stacked allowed him to dodge a constitutional ban on presidents running for a second term.
Comoros: In the small Indian ocean nation of Comoros, President Azali Assoumani was re-elected for a fourth term in a poll disputed by the opposition as “fraudulent”. He secured the win with 63% of the vote, according to the country’s electoral body. However, turnout was low amid an opposition boycott, only 16% of people voted in the presidential election. After the results were announced, security forces clashed with protesters in several parts of the capital, Moroni.
Finland: On February 11, Alexander Stubb of the center-right National Coalition Party narrowly won Finland’s presidential election on Sunday, defeating liberal Green Party member Pekka Haavisto. Stubb is pro-European and a strong supporter of Ukraine who has taken a tough stance against Russia. The vote marks a new era in Finland, which for decades had elected presidents to foster diplomacy, and now instead opted not to join military alliances such as with NATO.
Elections with global impact:
United States: It should come as no surprise that the Presidential and Congressional elections in the US are some of the most highly observed in the world. On November 8, 2024, the results of US elections will affect the world and the direction of many conflicts, negotiations, business dealings, the future state of the climate, and more. Conflicts like the war in Ukraine and war in Gaza will have profound impacts depending on who wins the 2024 election. Relationships with traditional allies could also be strained by a possible second Trump presidency, along with the US’ credibility and perception as a reliable partner has already been damaged, and of course in an increasingly polarized and militarized world there is the possibility of either candidate inflaming tensions with different adversarial states. The US elections will have profound impacts on the future of the international system. We will have to wait and see whether it will be a continuation of the current administration’s policies or a return to Trumpism.
India: In India, which is often called the world’s largest experiment in democracy, voters are expected to head to the polls at a still undisclosed date between April-May 2024. India which has a population of over 1.4 billion is likely to see a majority of its voters reelect Prime Minister Narendra Modi to secure a rare third term in power. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been accused of enabling democratic backsliding since 2016. Modi throughout his tenure in office has been accused of cracking down on opponents, restricting press freedom and persecuting the country’s Muslim and other ethnic and religious minorities. Facing off against Modi is a newly formed alliance of 26 political parties known as INDIA, which includes the country’s main opposition, the Indian National Congress.
EU Elections: Far-right parties are becoming increasingly dominant in national settings across many EU capitals. The June 2024 European Parliament elections will likely see a major shift to the right in many countries, with populist radical right parties gaining votes across the EU. Many center-left and green parties will likely lose votes and seats. Anti-European Union populists are likely to top the polls in nine member states (Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, France, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, and Slovakia). Much of the shift to the right can be attributed to rising anti-immigrant sentiment across the continent. EU elections will shape the bloc’s approach to climate policy, aid to Ukraine, and the bloc’s ability to work and stay united.
Russia: On Friday March 15, 2024, Russia will hold its presidential elections, yet of course, there is already little doubt as to who will emerge the winner from these elections. The upcoming Russian elections are more of a spectacle than serious competition for the future of the country. It’s likely Russia’s current policies will continue on in another Putin administration. Vladimir Putin, should he win again, and serve a full six year term, will have been in power for 30 years total. This will be longer than any Russian or Soviet leader since Tsar Peter the Great (who died in 1721). Until recently, Russia’s constitution forbade more than two consecutive six year presidential terms. Though this is a constitutional rule that appears not to apply to the current occupant of the Kremlin. Putin’s main rival, opposition leader Alexei Navalny mysteriously died in prison late last week. Another of Russia’s presidential hopefuls, Boris Nadezhdin, has said his bid to run in elections in March has been blocked. Nadezhdin, is a prominent critic of the war in Ukraine and is not thought to be a likely challenger to unseat Putin.
Analysis
Democracy, the value and idea that human beings have the right to choose their own leaders is a much newer concept than many of us realize. Only about half of the world’s countries are electoral democracies, meaning that they hold free and fair multi-party elections. Of those countries, just 14 have been democracies for 100 or more years. The upcoming elections globally will present to us whether democracy can continue to endure through the current rise of extremism, violence, and polarization globally. Democracies often fall short of their promised ideals, but it is thus far in human history the only system that allows us a voice and the ability to learn and do better if we choose to do so.
Remember to stay in-the-know 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 Top 5 Worst GOP Bills: A Closer Look at Troubling Legislation
The Top 5 Worst GOP Bills: A Closer Look at Troubling Legislation
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #125 | By: William Bourque | February 23, 2024
Featured Photo taken from: www.thehill.com
__________________________________
In our world of American politics, GOP-sponsored bills often stir up controversy and debate. Some proposals, however, stand out for all the wrong reasons. From healthcare to taxes, environment to social programs, these bills have sparked concern and criticism across the political spectrum.
In this brief, we’re diving into the top five GOP bills that have raised eyebrows and ignited fierce opposition. We’ll explore what they sought to do and the motivations behind them. As we navigate through these bills, it’s crucial to understand the broader political landscape and the tensions driving these debates. While some see these proposals as solutions, many of these bills are foolish and short-sighted. This past year of Congressional proceedings have been nothing short of shocking – with House GOP members getting into physical altercations, screaming matches, and beefing on X (still Twitter in my book). Without further ado, the 5 worst GOP bills of this past year.
-
1. House Resolution 582: A resolution to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Mayorkas for High Crimes and Misdemeanors
The initial vote on this legislation, which was eventually blocked by Rep. Mike Gallagher, failed in embarrassing fashion for Speaker Mike Johnson. Mayorkas is the first cabinet secretary to be impeached since the 1870’s, when Secretary of War William Belknap was impeached. The motion eventually passed, which sets up a trial in the Senate. Policy differences aren’t impeachable offenses, and Mayorkas is primed to be acquitted by a Democratic-controlled Senate. The GOP is wasting taxpayer money and valuable time where they could be legislating.
-
2. House Resolution 1: Lower Energy Costs Act
This legislation looked to rollback a significant amount of Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, which provided tax credits for renewable energy development in addition to uplifting marginalized communities. The “Lower Energy Costs Act” creates incentives for fossil fuel development including a moratorium on a fracking ban. Not only is this legislation a step entirely backwards, it had no chance of passing the Senate, making it a glorious waste of time for all involved. Sure, it made for good headlines, but it (thankfully) made no substantive change or even came close to becoming law. Another messaging bill for the ever-more-pathetic GOP.
-
3. Biden Border Bill
One of the more egregious Republican moves from the past year is the recent rejection of a deal with President Biden which would have given significant money to border patrol in hopes of stemming the flow of migrants at the Southern border. Realistically, this was the best deal that the GOP could have hoped for. However, President Trump has come out against this bill several times – causing the GOP to turn their backs on the deal brokered by President Biden and GOP leadership. Since then, each and every member of GOP leadership has come out against the bill – making it incredibly obvious that they intend to use the border as a campaign talking point.
-
4. Cutting Foreign Aid (Ukraine et al)
Another policy position that the GOP has leaned into the past year is cutting foreign aid, namely to allies like Ukraine and Israel. While Israel has had many accusations of wrongdoing come up at the UN and within international circles, Ukraine is still universally supported in their fight against Russia…except in the Republican party. The fight against Russia is one of the most vital in the world especially given Putin’s additional consolidation of power. It’s notable that many Democrats have also called for an end to aid for Israel – although for different reasons than Republicans. Republicans seem to be using each and every discussion regarding aid as a campaign chip, hoping they can prop up former President Trump to another unlikely victory.
-
5. Various Censure Votes on Jamaal Bowman, Rashida Tlaib, and Adam Schiff
Yet another waste of time from the House of Representatives, censure votes. The most ridiculous of these three was against Adam Schiff, who made many comments relating to former President Trump and Russia (which are all probably true). House Republicans felt offended that Schiff would bring up this association and felt it was grounds for censure. Schiff wore it as a badge of honor and it seems to be helping him in the race for Senate in CA, where he leads in all polls. The next censure motion was against Rashida Tlaib, who made comments defending Palestine. For what it’s worth, Tlaib is a Palestinian-American and clearly felt like nobody in Congress was defending her people or her homeland – but the vote including both Democrats and Republicans makes this one feel slightly less egregious. There have been several GOP lawmakers who have made statements in opposition to Israel and they haven’t been censured…The last censure was against Jamaal Bowman, who accidentally pulled a fire alarm in the Capitol building that ended up delaying a vote. Bowman claims that it was accidental, and by all accounts, video footage doesn’t make it seem pre-meditated. Either way, censure does absolutely nothing and is only used as a political weapon, so it was another waste of time to go about this.
In a year marked by intense partisan clashes and headline-grabbing controversies, the three worst GOP bills of recent memory have epitomized political theater at its most wasteful. From futile attempts to impeach cabinet members to misguided efforts to roll back progressive policies, these bills have not only squandered valuable legislative time but also highlighted the stark divisions within Congress. As lawmakers engage in futile gestures and symbolic condemnations, the real issues facing the American people remain unaddressed. We don’t expect anything different from the GOP this year, and our election predictions will show that the GOP won’t be the majority in the House for much longer.
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 help protect democracy and empower citizenship.
“Alexei’s Death is a Murder Organized by Putin…”
“Alexei’s Death is a Murder Organized by Putin…”
Foreign Policy Brief #122 | By: Yelena Korshunov| February 23, 2024
Featured Photo taken from: www.euronews.com
__________________________________
Alexei Navalny, a leading opponent of Russia’s president Vladimir Putin, died in the Polar Wolf colony on February 16.
According to Russian officials, Navalny felt sick after a morning walk and “almost immediately” lost consciousness. Later, despite “all the necessary resuscitation measures” carried out by the ambulance team, Navalny was pronounced dead. However, some say Alexei’s death occurred earlier, on February 15, after he participated in a court hearing via video link. A prisoner of the Polar Wolf, on condition of anonymity, told the Russian European news portal “Novaya Gazeta Europe” that Navalny could have died later that day.
When employees of the colony accelerated the evening verification and strengthened security, “so that it was impossible to stick a nose out of the cell.” At the same time, “one could hear some cars driving into the zone three times late in the evening and at night.” The morning of February 16th began with a thorough search of the barracks, and already at 10 a.m. (8 a.m. Moscow time) rumors about Alexei’s death spread throughout the colony.
From statements by Navalny’s associates, we know that since February 14, he was kept in a punishment cell for yet another far-fetched reason, and it was the 27th time he was sent there.
Overall, Navalny spent almost 300 days within a punishment cell, leaving a blood-curdling description of the torture, “The solitary confinement cell is a 2.5 x 3 meter [8.2 x 9.8 ft.] concrete kennel. Most of the time it’s unbearable there because it’s cold and damp. There’s water on the floor. I got the beach version – it’s very hot and there’s almost no air. The window is tiny, and the walls are too thick for any air flow – even the cobwebs don’t move. There’s no ventilation. At night you lie there and feel like a fish on the shore. At 5 a.m. they take away your mattress and pillow and raise your bunk. At 9 p.m. the bunk is lowered again and the mattress is returned. There’s an iron table, an iron bench, a sink, a hole in the floor and two cameras on the ceiling.”
Navalny’s body was not released to his mother.
The colony stated that Navalny’s body was transported to the morgue in Salekhard [nearby city]. The politician’s mother and lawyer arrived at the morgue just to find it closed. They called the phone number on the door and were told that there was no Alexei Navalny’s body. Navalny’s press secretary Kira Yarmysh said that the Investigative Committee of Salekhard told the politician’s lawyer that the cause of Navalny’s death had not been established, “a repeat histological examination has been taken,” and the results of which will be known next week. There is a growing opinion in the press that Navalny’s body is not being given to loved ones in order to cover up the traces of the tortures and murder.
Russian authorities’ and world’s reaction to Navalny’s death.
Immediately after Navalny’s death was announced to the public it resonated throughout the continents. Protests took place all over the world for three days as a sign of solidarity with the oppositionist and his family. At least 360 protesters were detained in Russia. The widow of politician Yulia Navalnaya said that she would continue the work of her deceased husband and called on everyone to fight with her.
On Monday, February 19th, the press secretary of the Russian President Dmitry Peskov told reporters that “the investigation is underway and all necessary actions in this regard are being carried out, but so far the results of this investigation have not been made public and, in fact, they are still unknown.” When asked whether the Kremlin was interested in conducting a thorough investigation into this matter, he replied: “The actions that are provided in accordance with Russian legislation are being carried out.” When Peskov was asked by journalists whether he knew when all procedures related to the release of Navalny’s body to relatives could be completed, he said “No, this is not a question for us. We are not involved in this matter. This is not the function of the presidential administration.”
Answering journalists’ question of what Vladimir Putin’s reaction was to Alexei’s death, Peskov said: “I have nothing to add to what has been said on this topic.” Peskov also clarified that the President of the Russian Federation has not yet publicly spoken out in connection with Navalny’s death. The Speaker of the State Duma [Russia’s Federal Assembly] Vyacheslav Volodin went further, shifting the blame to Washington and Brussels for Navalny’s death.
Thousands of people around the world pay tribute to Alexei Navalny, expressing condolences and support to his family, and blaming Putin for murdering his strong political opponent. Garry Kasparov, chess grandmaster, former World Chess Champion and opposition politician said, “Putin tried and failed to kill Navalny quickly and secretly with poison—and now he killed him slowly and in front of everyone in prison. He [Navalny] was killed for showing the world Putin and his mafia as the crooks and thieves that they are. My thoughts are with the wife and children of this brave man.”
Former US President Barack Obama has described Alexei Navalny as “a fearless advocate for his beliefs who died unbroken by the tyranny he opposed.”
Soviet dissident, former Russia’s political prisoner, and Israeli statesman Natan Sharansky said that “in fact, this is a monstrous torture. Out of 2.5 years [of imprisonment], a person [Navalny] was kept in a punishment cell for almost a year, which in my time was a real torture of hunger and cold. And judging by what he wrote to me, it’s the same today. Therefore, it is clear that he was, one might say, killed there every day. This is revenge, and fear, and the desire to strangle him and his voice. With his life and his death, he showed how to fight evil, uncompromisingly and to the end.”
Ilya Barabanov, special correspondent of the BBC Russian Service Today wrote, “I lost a friend whom I knew for almost 20 years, and millions of people in Russia lost hope for a normal future. Alexei’s ability to instill hope in people, even when he was already in a distant colony, was his amazing talent.”
Prime Minister of Spain, Pedro Sanchez said he was “shocked by the news of the death in prison of Alexei Navalny, unjustly imprisoned by the Putin regime for defending human rights and democracy.”
President of France, Emmanuel Macron stated that “in today’s Russia, free spirits are sent to the Gulag and sentenced to death. I pay tribute to the memory of Alexei Navalny, his dedication, his courage.”
Former Russia’s State Duma deputy, Dmitry Gudkov shared his thoughts, “I cannot believe this. But if everything is confirmed, then Alexei’s death is a murder organized by Putin. Even if Alexei died from “natural” causes, they were caused by his poisoning and further prison torture. (His) blood is on Putin. One more in addition to the hundreds of thousands killed – also by him – in the war.”
Joe Biden stated that “Putin is responsible for Navalny’s Death”
British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said “This is terrible news. As the most ardent defender of Russian democracy, Alexei Navalny has demonstrated incredible courage throughout his life.”
When after being poisoned Navalny made a decision to return to Russia from his treatment in Germany, he should’ve known that he would be detained and that Putin would make another attempt to break him or take his life. Why did he return? Why didn’t he stay in Germany to lead his democratic political platform from abroad? This is how a journalist Andrei Loshak answered these questions, “Many people wrote throughout these three years: “Why did he return, what kind of idiocy, what kind of senseless self-sacrifice?” It’s just that people don’t understand who Alexey is. And for those who knew him, it was natural. You see him in life and understand this is a person that cannot do otherwise.”
Engagement Resources:
- Alexei Navalny’s Widow Voes to Continue his Fight for a Free Russia, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/alexei-navalnys-widow-vows-to-continue-his-fight-for-a-free-russia
- The Death of Alexei Navalny, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-death-of-alexei-navalny/
- In Navalny’s death, Putin cements a new era of Russian dictatorship, https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/02/19/alexei-navalny-putin-rule-dictator-power-death/
- Official Website of Alexei Navalny (in Russian language), https://navalny.com/
Stay up-to-date 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 help protect democracy and empower citizenship.
The Future of Quality Education Lies in the Past: How Liberal Arts Education Provides a Way Forward for Critical Thinking
The Future of Quality Education Lies in the Past:
How liberal arts education provides a way forward for critical thinking
Education Policy Brief #89 | By: Rudolph Lurz | February 22, 2024
Featured Photo taken from: www.manavrachna.edu.in
__________________________________
The early years of the third millennium were laser-focused on STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) education. Under George W. Bush, the Spellings Commission reported how far the U.S. was falling behind in STEM fields. It recommended ways to close the gap, such as improving recruitment and retention of women in STEM. President Barack Obama called for 100,000 new math and science teachers and established a federal committee to focus on STEM issues. In 2009, Governor Martin O’Malley of Maryland established a commission on STEM education and created a plan to boost the number of STEM graduates from Maryland universities by 40%. As Governor of New Jersey, Chris Christie established a fellowship program to attract new STEM teachers to New Jersey. The message from U.S. policy actors was clear. The country was falling behind economic rivals in STEM education, and measures were needed to improve American performance in these subjects.
Promotion of STEM education had a de facto effect of putting less emphasis on liberal arts subjects. STEM projects, as a result of these directives from state and federal policy actors, received priority over liberal arts projects in funding from colleges, state governments, and private foundations. However, direct antagonism against the liberal arts was rare. The liberal arts were being ignored, but at least they were not being attacked.
That changed early in the 2010s. The tone from policy actors became much more bellicose against liberal arts subjects. Florida was the epicenter of this antagonistic approach. In 2011, Florida Governor Rick Scott noted, “If I’m going to take money from a citizen to put into education then I’m going to take that money to create jobs. Is it a vital interest of the state to have more anthropologists? I don’t think so.”
Proponents of STEM borrowed rhetoric from the Cold War-era Space Race. If the U.S. was falling behind in STEM, it was not only an education or economic issue; it was a national security issue. This approach created a zero-sum game between STEM and liberal arts disciplines. STEM had to be pushed ahead of the liberal arts to protect the country’s future, and directing any funding to the liberal arts was not only wasteful, it created vulnerabilities that could not be tolerated. In this inhospitable environment, dozens of liberal arts departments at colleges across the country were shut down or endured major budget cuts.
Over a decade after Rick Scott’s remarks, it appears that the focus on STEM education has paid dividends. Americans received 412,100 bachelor’s degrees in STEM fields in 2010. In 2018, that number was 669,600, an increase of 62%. In that same time period, degree growth in all other subjects was approximately 20%. In 2010, 52,900 professional or doctoral STEM degrees were earned by Americans. In 2018, that figure was 72,000, an increase of 36%. Women make up a majority of students at American medical schools, passing the 50% mark for the first time in 2017. President Obama’s foundation celebrated reaching his goal of 100,000 new STEM teachers in November, 2021.
These achievements in STEM did not come without a cost. Misinformation is rampant in this Information Age society. 16% of Americans believe that there is some truth to the QAnon conspiracy theory. The far-right movement reached its head when thousands of rioters stormed and desecrated the U.S. Capitol on January 6th, 2021. Only 15% of American 8th graders scored proficient or above in history, and only 24% in civics. AI usage is rampant at U.S. high schools and universities.
The country has improved its standing in STEM education. However, neglecting liberal arts disciplines caused a detrimental impact on critical thinking skills and basic civics knowledge.
What good is proficiency in STEM if young Americans cannot tell the difference between conspiracy theories and valid evidence? How can STEM improve American society if young Americans cannot participate in basic elements of the American Republic?
Analysis
There is a common joke I hear in higher education policy circles. Focusing on theater and the fine arts without the liberal arts is how you get Batman villains. Focusing on STEM without the liberal arts is how you get Spiderman villains.
In recent education policy, there has been a movement toward STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, ARTS, and Mathematics) instead of STEM alone to foster innovation and technological proficiency. Going back to that old adage, if the United States does not combine a STEM approach with liberal arts instruction, we are heading for a society filled with both Batman and Spiderman villains.
I did my dissertation research on STEM and liberal arts policy in Florida. My research showed that it was unproductive and unnecessary to denigrate liberal arts disciplines to promote STEM projects. I also suggested that economic impact from state investment in higher education was not linear. Cold War, zero-sum rhetoric does not fit STEM education policy initiatives. STEM education is not a race to the moon with geopolitical implications. In reality, it is more like a gym. Many different approaches are possible to achieve success and growth. Policy actors should embrace the unpredictable nature of economic impact through education, and work on producing opportunistic communicators. These are folks who can recognize opportunities in the 21st century economy and communicate them effectively to varied groups of stakeholders.
There’s no need to beat up on psychology and anthropology to promote STEM subjects. It is not an either/or, zero-sum, Cold War fight. A recent report estimated that a majority of 2030’s jobs do not exist yet. Education institutions should not be job training centers for the jobs of the present. They should be incubators for molding minds capable of producing innovation in a rapidly-changing world.
Those are the types of skills taught in the liberal arts.
We’ve had this fight before. Colleges were told in the early 19th century that the liberal arts model was antiquated and should be replaced by one more suitable for the business needs of the time. The faculty of Yale College answered these critics with the Yale Report of 1828, which defended the traditional liberal arts curriculum. The authors state,
“From different quarters we have heard the suggestion that our colleges must be new-modeled; that they are not adapted to the spirit and wants of the age; that they will soon be deserted, unless they are better accommodated to the business character of the nation. At this point we have an important bearing upon the question immediately before the committee, we would ask their indulgence, while we attempt to explain, at some length, the nature and object of the present plan of education. The two great points to be gained in intellectual culture are the discipline and furniture of the mind; expanding its powers and storing it with knowledge” [emphasis authors’].
In a past article, I opined that such “furniture” also had a place in 21st century education. I discussed how disparate major/minor combinations, such as STEM or business majors with liberal or fine arts minors, were the best pathways to success both in the job market as well as elite graduate programs. Music and English majors are statistically more likely to be accepted into medical schools than biology or chemistry majors. The market demands doctors who can communicate and think creatively. It also demands citizens who can do the same.
The liberal arts today are in a better position than they were in 1828 or when Rick Scott ripped into anthropology in 2011. Policy actors on both sides of the aisle recognize that civic education and critical thinking are important. That is a good thing.
It is my firm belief that the true study of the liberal arts provides the answer to America’s education needs. Liberal arts disciplines seek out hard topics. The world itself is hard and uncomfortable. The place to learn how to approach spaces of contestation with civility and rationality is not the boardroom as a 30-year-old, but rather the classroom as a 13-year-old. It is ironic to me that the political party that claims to support freedom and liberty is so dead-set on controlling every aspect of education. The conservative policy actors who call progressives “snowflakes” are such delicate flowers that they refuse to allow discussions on contentious topics and seek to remove thousands of books from school libraries that even mention things like racism, slavery, or LGBTQ+ issues.
2030 will require a population of students who know how to think. It is our sovereign duty to give them that power. We must use the liberal arts strategies of the past to prepare students for the challenges ahead. If we fail, authoritarian policy actors will use the propaganda methods of the past to lead America’s future adults to a place that is not a functioning republic.
Engagement Resources:
- Spellings Commission Report of 2006: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED493504.pdf
- Florida K-12 Civic Education Standards: https://www.fldoe.org/core/fileparse.php/18736/urlt/CivicsGovernment.pdf
Stay up-to-date 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 help protect democracy and empower citizenship.
Young Black Voters Lack Enthusiasm for Presidential Candidates
Young Black Voters Lack Enthusiasm for Presidential Candidates
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #124 | By: Abigail Hunt | February 22, 2024
Featured Photo taken from: www.cnn.com
__________________________________
Four years ago, voting records show, people of color (POC), particularly Black voters, used their voices to help elect President Joe Biden. In the years since, those voters have grown disillusioned. No one is excited about a match between two zombies, and that is what we’re facing with our 2024 presidential candidates. A rematch between two white walkers – Donald Trump and Joe Biden.
In an editorial by NPR, the Black voters, “under 35,” with whom they spoke said of the issues most concerning to them, primary among them was the cost of, and access to, education, including funding for historically Black colleges (HBCU), student loan forgiveness, and whether or not a candidate supports socialist programs and workers’ unions.
In 2016, Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders galvanized younger generations with his unwavering socialist spirit and whip-crack wit and intellect. In contrast, Trump and Biden are stodgy and wooden, with declining cognitive function. Tens of thousands of people turned out to see Bernie speak. People were excited to believe in someone. Then the Democratic National Convention got involved and forced Bernie out to get Hillary Clinton in – she won, but Trump took office anyway, and yet again, Democrats showed voters how little fight they had in them.
The two-party systems’ dogged dedication to preserving the status quo may have been a nail in its own coffin. The young Black voters who spoke with NPR say no one they know wants to vote. Voters too young to have been disillusioned by Bernie’s blackballing are old enough to remember Trump as President. For some of them, this election is exciting because it is the first in which they are old enough to vote. What 18-year-old gets excited about an elderly man who stumbles and fumbles his way through speeches and across stages? It is embarrassing on an international level that the two “best” options we have for President have a greater likelihood of dying in office just by existing – not because they’ll be in danger from assassins, but because they simply continue to grow older at an age when any wrong move could result in a spill that spells the end.
In late February, the New York case Trump faced came to conclusion, saddling Trump with a $355 million fine. Right after, Trump launched his own sneaker brand, where supporters can pre-order gold sneakers emblazoned with the American flag. I wish I was joking. https://gettrumpsneakers.com/ The sneakers sold out immediately, which sounds impressive. However, any information can be manipulated. If only 10 pair were produced, selling out is far less impressive in actual numbers. The premise of exclusivity is seductive for people, and the “sold out” aspect is likely to lure some into purchasing. Trump never seems to concern himself too much with what voters actually need. When he made an appearance at Philadelphia’s Sneaker Con to launch the shoe line, he was greeted with boos.
While a shoe show might at first seem an odd choice of location for Trump to make an appearance, Sneaker Con, like Trump, brands itself the greatest, specifically “The Greatest Sneaker Show on Earth.” There seems to be a harmony of self-aggrandizement, at least. It may be that Ye is his new political advisor; politicians have made worse choices (remember George W. Bush and Ted Haggard?). The choice of a sneaker line is a bit out of left field – is this Trump’s way of appealing to a younger demographic? Or, more likely, would it be an attempt to pay that hefty New York fine? The U.S. sneaker industry generated $22.3 billion in 2023.
If Biden wants to win over younger generations and bring them to the ballot box, he needs to give them something better than a gaudy gold shoe. Perhaps he needs them to have hope. Barack Obama campaigned on hope, and he won. Bernie was someone to believe in, a champion of the people. Biden’s promises to forgive student loan debt have only partially come to pass. Federal legalization of marijuana never manifested. The Democratic signpost arguments for universal healthcare and free college, so passionate and prevalent among Presidential candidates during the last election cycle, faded away. Maybe the best thing Biden and Trump could do for their parties is just that – fade back and give way to the voices of a younger generation.
Engagement Resources
- U.S. General Services Administration. Check Voter Registration and Guidelines in Your State. https://vote.gov/
- LinkedIn. Sneaker Market Research Report on Regional Size and Status 2023-2030. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/sneaker-market-research-report-regional?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_ios&utm_campaign=share_via
Remember to get 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!