JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
Takeaways From the Presidential Immunity Decision
Brief #227 – Civil Rights Policy Brief
by: Rodney A. Maggay
The presidential immunity case was expected to be a blockbuster case and when it finally was handed down it did not disappoint. The case was always going to be controversial. While there are notable points to highlight, a closer examination of the decision reveals…
Guarding Young Minds: The Call for Social Media Warning Labels and Its Implications
Brief #93 – Education Policy Brief
by: Inijah Quadri
In an era dominated by digital platforms, social media has become a central part of daily life, not just for adults but significantly for children and youth.
The Swing States Series: #2 Michigan
Brief #132 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by: Abigail Hunt
Michigan, a pivotal swing state, boasts the highest youth voter turnout in the nation and a thriving manufacturing sector crucial to its economy. As the state gears up for the upcoming election, its diverse demographic and rich history make it a battleground to watch.
Impact of Remote Work on Urban Development
Brief #62 – Economic Policy Brief
by: Inijah Quadri
The rise of remote work, spurred by the COVID-19 pandemic, is reshaping urban landscapes and challenging traditional city planning. As cities adapt to this new reality, the shift presents both opportunities for sustainable development and significant hurdles for local economies reliant on office workers.
We Are Transitioning from Fossil Fuels, but is the Transition Fast Enough?
Brief #170 – Environment Policy Brief
by : Todd J. Broadman
As the world cautiously shifts away from fossil fuels, the pace of transition remains frustratingly slow, hampered by economic and regulatory challenges. With renewable energy sources still struggling to achieve dominance, the need for a unified, large-scale effort akin to a carbon-transition Marshall Plan has never been more urgent.
Putin’s Ceasefire Proposition. Peace or Nonsense?
Brief #147 – Foreign Policy Brief
by: Yelena Korshunov
In a bold move, Putin’s latest ceasefire proposition demands Ukraine relinquish significant territories and abandon its NATO aspirations, a strategy widely criticized as manipulative and insincere. As global leaders dismiss the plan as propaganda, Ukraine remains resolute in its fight for sovereignty and democratic values.
The New York Trial that No One is Paying Attention To
Brief #131 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by: Arvind Salem
Amid the media frenzy over President Trump’s trial, the bribery case against Senator Robert Menendez has flown under the radar despite its serious allegations of corruption involving political favors and substantial bribes. With powerful testimonies and high-stakes political implications, this trial could reshape New Jersey’s political landscape and challenge the integrity of public office.
The Supreme Court Bump Stock Ruling Explained
Brief #226 – Civil Rights Policy Brief
by: Arvind Salem
In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court struck down the ATF’s bump stock ban, ruling it an unconstitutional overreach of executive authority. This verdict not only impacts the regulation of gun accessories but also sets a precedent that could undermine future gun control efforts.
AIPAC’s War Chest Draws Opposition
Brief #146 – Foreign Policy Brief
by: Mindy Spatt
AIPAC’s unprecedented $100 million war chest is targeting progressive legislators, igniting a fierce political battle that has united Republican donors and spurred a robust counter-movement from progressive Jewish groups. With high-stakes elections looming, the conflict underscores deepening divisions over U.S. policy towards Israel and the influence of powerful lobbying organizations.
Why is Iran attacking Israel?
Why is Iran attacking Israel?
Foreign Policy Brief #139 | By: Arvind Salem | April 26, 2024
Featured Photo: www.msnbc.com
__________________________________
In the midst of conflict between Israel and Gaza, tensions rose as Israel and Iran are now trading attacks. The two historical enemies have usually traded barbs on the international stage and attacked each other through proxies or involvement in other countries, but this is the first time that they are attacking each other directly.
Like most of Israel’s current offenses, this one goes back to the attack on October 7th, which was perpetrated by Hamas: a proxy group of Iran. After launching an offensive in Gaza meant to eradicate Hamas, Israel is now beginning to fight the interests behind Hamas: Iran themselves.
On April 1, Israel launched a strike that killed several senior Iranian commanders at Iran’s embassy complex in Syria. They were fairly confident that Iran would not retaliate in a serious way, so confident that they only told the US, their biggest ally, about the strike moments before it happened. However, this proved to be a miscalculation as Iran launched a retaliatory barrage of more than 300 drones and missiles at Israel. However, Israel, working with a U.S.-led international coalition led by the United States, said it intercepted 99% of the incoming fire, though some missiles landed, damaging an Israeli military base and wounding a young girl. Israel recently responded with a strike that hit a military air base near the city of Isfahan. However, after this strike, both sides had very tempered responses, indicating that they did not seek to escalate tensions further.
Policy Analysis:
World Leaders are putting their attention on this evolving conflict as a full scale war would be disastrous for a region that is already being devastated by the conflict in Gaza. The Group of 7, Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United States, is devoting a meeting towards addressing ways to de escalate this issue and other world leaders, like Jordan’s foreign minister Ayman Safadi, are calling for a quick de escalation and a renewed focus on the situation in Gaza.
Fortunately, the tensions don’t appear that they will escalate: mainly because no side has any incentive to escalate tensions at this point. The United States, Iran, and Israel are in the unique position where they could all credibly claim victory. Iran can say it has attacked Israel, Israel can say that they attacked Iran and subsequently defended themselves from a counterstrike, and the United States can say that they defended Israel and deterred Iran from further escalating. With such a stable combination of incentives, the situation is unlikely to escalate further. In any other situation, this delicate balance will be upset. More attacks from Israel will risk harming their already poor international reputation. If Iran attacks, it will lead to them getting in a fight with the United States, and likely the rest of the G7, which is something that they are not equipped to deal with. The United States, although not in a position of agency, has in interest in maintaining their position as a fair international diplomat and authority in these negotiations to further boost their international credibility as threats from China and Russia threaten to destabilize that position.
In the future, things will likely revert back to how they were before: Israel will likely renew their focus on their offensive in Gaza, Iran will try to assist their proxies in the region, and the United States will try to strike the fine balance between supporting Israel while being conscious of international human rights considerations and perhaps negotiating some sort of compromise.
Engagement Resources:
- Alliance for Middle East Peace, This is an organization that seeks to promote peace in the Middle East, especially between Israel and Palestine in light of the current situation. Readers who are worried about destabilization in the region may be interested in this organization.
- The Road to Recovery, The Road to Recovery is an Israeli association of volunteers that helps vulnerable people in Gaza and the West Bank get treatment in Israeli hospitals. Readers who are worried about continued conflicts in the region and its humanitarian implications for Gaza may be interested in this organization.
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.
Women’s Health Research Gets Its Priorities Straight
Women’s Health Research Gets Its Priorities Straight
Health and Gender Policy Brief #173 | By: Abigail Hunt | April 24, 2024
Featured Photo: www.twitter.com
__________________________________
On March 18th, 2024, President Biden signed an executive order requiring medical treatment for women will be based on research with female study participants and subjects. It was not until Gen X hit their teens that the scientific fields acknowledged the need to study an entire population they had been treating half-blind for centuries – women.
Throughout history, women made discoveries and used their brilliance to change the world. Some by publishing research under a man’s name, like Mileva Marić-Einstein, Albert Einstein’s first wife, who actually obtained higher marks than Albert in testing in physics class. By Albert’s own admission, Mileva kept him focused on research. Some women influenced society and furthered progress through skilled communication and subtle maneuvering, like Eleanor Roosevelt did as First Lady, although FDR is lauded for her accomplishments.
The erasure of women from history facilitates the furthering of the invisibility of women today. Everyone on this earth was carried in utero by a biological female; everyone has a mother. Despite the pivotal importance of being the primary providers of propagation and tutelage of the human race – of single parents across the globe, 84 percent are women – health care for women in the United States is abysmal.
In a 2003 study by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), researchers’ failure to verify subjects’ cause of death led to a much higher maternal mortality rate than the reality. The overall maternal mortality rate for the U.S. from 2018-2021 averaged 10.4 per 100,000 live births, but the NCHS study claimed the rate was more than twice that – 23.6 per 100,000 live births. Despite the lower actual numbers, according to CIA.gov the U.S. still comes in at the 122nd worst on a global ranking for maternal mortality rates, bested by 64 countries, including Lebanon, Latvia, Malaysia, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, among others.
Analysis
The errors made in the aforementioned calculations are perhaps an apt example of the vast deficits in our female-focused research. For example, amniotic fluid embolism (AFE) is the second leading cause of death for women in the time just before, during, and after childbirth. Fifty percent of those with AFE die within the first hour. It affects one in every 40,000 births in North America. Most women have likely never heard of this condition, and probably no one has taught them about it. This author has been through that process with three children, and I learned about it by happenstance. Because men are the ones doing the research, they perhaps do not consider problems which only women face, meaning there are huge gaps in knowledge, an Achilles’ heel in our health care system.
Since its beginnings, biomedical scientific research was carried out by male scientists who studied only male subjects. Although currently about half of the population is female, there is significant gender bias against women in research. It is also true that men go understudied in certain areas of science; the disparity men face in gender bias occurs less often. This legislation guaranteeing female-focused research is progress in the right direction.
One cannot discuss women’s health while ignoring abortion access as part of the discussion – to do so would perpetuate the same patriarchal ignorance which has detrimentally affected women’s health in this country since its inception. Like most things in life, this story of progress in women’s health care is convoluted. Since the summer 2022 Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade, the pivotal SCOTUS case which resulted in federal legal protection for abortion access for the next almost half a century, several states have outlawed abortion access entirely. Should a total federal abortion ban, for which many conservative politicians advocate, come to pass, it would result in a 21 percent increase in the maternal mortality rate. Zealots are calling for women who seek abortion to face the death penalty. Women face dire consequences should a pregnancy end in anything other than a live birth; nowadays, women who have spontaneous miscarriage face interrogation and suspicion at a time when they should be given comfort and consolation. For women, the reality is a nightmare dystopia akin to Gilead. One half-expects to see red robes and white bonnets materializing in grocery markets. In a world where politicians advocate for women to face the death penalty for abortion, Biden’s announcement reads like lip service.
Engagement Resources
- Kheyfets, A., et al. The impact of hostile abortion legislation on the United States maternal mortality crisis: a call for increased abortion education. National Library of Medicine, National Institute of Health, National Center for Biotechnology Information. December 5, 2023. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10728320/
- Long, C. Biden signs executive order on advancing study of women’s health while chiding ‘backward’ GOP ideas. AP News. March 18th, 2024. https://apnews.com/article/biden-executive-order-womens-health-0b6ac1fb1d6f041a4e24b70d2e50d5c2
- Chavda, K., Nisarga, V. Single Parenting: Impact on Child’s Development. Journal of Indian Association for Child and Adolescent Mental Health. August 5, 2023. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/09731342231179017#:~:text=Among%20the%20single%20parents%20in,and%20the%20family’s%20economic%20survival.
- Joseph, K.S., et al. Maternal mortality in the United States: are the high and rising rates due to changes in obstetrical factors, maternal medical conditions, or maternal mortality surveillance? American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. April 2024. https://www.ajog.org/article/S0002-9378(24)00005-X/fulltext
- Haftel, A., et al. Amniotic Fluid Embolism. National Library of Medicine, National Institute of Health, National Center for Biotechnology Information. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK559107/#:~:text=Amniotic%20fluid%20embolism%20(AFE)%20is,fluid%20enters%20the%20maternal%20bloodstream.
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 Full Saga of the Mayorkas Impeachment
The Full Saga of the Mayorkas Impeachment
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #128 | By: Arvind Salem | April 23, 2024
Featured Photo: www.thehill.com
__________________________________
On April 17th, 2024, the historic impeachment trial of Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas, the first time in nearly 150 years that a Cabinet secretary was impeached, came to a quiet end. After a protracted political fight, resulting in impeachment in the House, the Senate dismissed the Articles of Impeachment without holding a trial.
In February, the House impeached Mayorkas after a nearly year-long impeachment inquiry. The inquiry resulted in House Republicans impeaching Mayorkas on two articles of impeachment: willfully ignoring the law and breaching the public’s trust. The House alleged that Mayorkas willfully ignored the law by not complying with immigration law, citing a decision to release migrants after they arrived at the southern border. This technically violates a law that requires the detention of all migrants entering the country; however, no administration in the history of the country has detained all migrants that entered the country because it is extremely hard to catch all migrants crossing the border and the United States does not have sufficient space to detain people as they await immigration hearings. The House also said that Mayorkas breached the public trust by lying to Congress when he testified that the border was “secure”. This technically does not meet the definition of Secure under the Secure Fence Act, which says the standard for security is met when not a single person or good wrongly crosses the border.
After Mayorkas was impeached in the House, the matter of deciding whether he would be removed from office was the responsibility of the Senate. Very few would expect the Democrat-controlled Senate to actually convict Mayorkas. However, the Senate took the extra step of dismissing the articles of impeachment without actually going through with the trial, arguing that the impeachment was unconstitutional. Their argument rested on the fact that this impeachment effort was motivated by policy disagreements with the Biden administration’s border policy and not because Mayorkas’s actions met the Constitutional standard of “high crime or misdemeanor” that would merit impeachment. In party-line votes of 51-48 and 51-49 for the first and second articles respectively, with Senator Murkowski voting “present” for the first vote, the Senate dismissed both impeachment articles.
Republicans were incensed that the Senate did not even bring the impeachment to a trial, arguing that this creates the dangerous precedent that the Senate can simply disregard their constitutional duty to try impeachments: with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) calling this a “very unfortunate precedent” and observing that “this is a day that’s not a proud day in the history of the Senate.” Of course, McConnell did not bother to address the apparent contradiction of his current position to his position in 2021, when he voted in favor of the unsuccessful Republican effort to dismiss President Trump’s impeachment in 2021. For his part, Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) responded that the Senate was obligated to set the precedent that impeachment should not be used to resolve policy disagreements, and should be reserved for more serious matters.
Policy Analysis:
Although Republicans lost this battle, the outcome of the war is yet to be determined. With a Democratic majority, there is no way that Republicans expected to reach the 67 votes needed to actually remove Mayorkas from office, especially after they barely united their fractured House caucus to adopt the articles of impeachment (they passed by a 214-213 vote). It is much more likely that this was a political calculation to hit an issue area that is weak for the Biden campaign ahead of the 2024 election, and attempting to put the very same immigration issue that catapulted Trump to victory back in the spotlight ahead of the election. This calculation is well-informed: Republicans are traditionally perceived as stronger on the border, with a September 2023 NBC News poll, finding that 50% of voters trust Republicans on the issue compared to just 20% trusting Democrats.
The Republican effort to put this issue at the top of the public mind also seems to be working, with a Wall Street Journal poll just last month, in the midst of the Mayorkas impeachment, finding that immigration was either one of the top two issues on voters’ minds in seven important swing states, including Arizona, Pennsylvania, and Georgia. This inquiry-based approach to cast doubts on a President’s policy has worked in the past. Research from political scientists Douglas Kriner and Eric Schickler has found that if legislators spent 20 days per month on public policy investigative hearings, the president’s approval rating could drop by 2.5 percent. Senate Democrats have likely blunted much of the political impact of this impeachment by dismissing it so early, and in doing so, may have saved the election, while Trump is mired in his legal scandals.
However, broadly, the devolution of impeachment into a politically-motivated procedure used to win an election is a deeply disturbing development. Once a serious seldom-used procedure, it has become more and more common: morphing into a somewhat routine procedure that has lost its former weight. In this situation, it was Republicans abusing the system, but there have likely been offenses by both sides to devalue impeachment, a process central to the structural integrity of our democracy.
Engagement Resources
- Joe Biden for President, Those who agree with the Biden immigration policies that Mayorkas carried out and want to ensure his election, may wish to contribute to his campaign for President.
- FAIR, FAIR, the Federation for American Immigration Reform, is a nonpartisan, public-interest organization that seeks to evaluate policies and develop solutions to reduce the impact of excessive immigration on all facets of the nation including security, the economy, and healthcare. Readers who are interested in immigration policy and want to hear policy-based solutions to the immigration crisis may be interested in this organization.
- American Immigration Council, The American Immigration Council works to ensure due process for all immigrants by increasing access to legal counsel for immigrants and using the legal system to ensure fair treatment for immigrants. Readers who are worried about the effects of the political momentum to tighten the border on more vulnerable immigrants may be interested in this organization.
- GDAMS 2024 Statement · War Costs Us The Earth
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 Week That Was: Global News in Review
The Week That Was: Global News in Review
Foreign Policy Brief #138 | By: Abran C | April 17, 2024
Featured Photo: www.biznews.com
__________________________________
Israel and Iran conflict
Israel’s military chief on Monday said the country would respond to an Iranian missile and drone attack on Israeli territory, the first time Tehran has attacked Israel directly. Israel has suggested it would ignore calls for restraint by allies and the United Nations who are anxious to avoid a further escalation of conflict in the Middle East. Iran launched the attack on Israel as response to an Israeli strike on the Iranian consulate in Damascus, Syria, earlier this month that killed seven Iranian officials. Iran sent nearly 300 drones and missiles towards Israel, but Israel’s air defense systems along with US, UK, and Jordanian forces shot down nearly all incoming objects and no casualties were reported.
The attack, which was announced days before actually being carried out, has been described by some analysts as mainly a show of force that Iran used in order to demonstrate an ability to retaliate without seeking further conflict. The White House on Monday said President Biden told Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the US won’t support any Israeli offensive against Iran. The bombing of the Iranian consulate and subsequent drone fleet sent towards Israel has brought with it a new phase of tension, uncertainty and confrontation in the Middle East that is striking fear of a region-wide conflict.
Ecuador and Mexico Cut Ties
Mexico’s government has severed diplomatic ties with Ecuador after police raided the Mexican Embassy to arrest former Ecuadorian vice president Jorge Glas. The former Ecuadorian VP sought political asylum at the embassy after being indicted on corruption charges. Mexico, as well as foreign experts, say it was a blatant violation of international accords. Diplomatic premises are considered foreign soil and under the Vienna treaties and a host country’s law enforcement agencies are not allowed to enter without the permission of the ambassador. Following the raid Mexico filed a complaint at the international court of justice in the Netherlands asking the UN to expel Ecuador. Leaders across Latin America condemned Ecuador’s actions, Venezuela and Honduras took actions to recall staff from the country and signal displeasure with the move.
Anniversary of War in Sudan
Sudan this week marked a year anniversary of its ongoing civil war. Aid agencies have warned that the country is on the edge of collapse. Sudan is facing an enormous humanitarian crisis that has been largely forgotten by the rest of the world as other conflicts and crises have taken center stage. After Sudan’s ruler of nearly 30 years, President Omar al-Bashir, was toppled by a popular uprising in 2019, a fragile transition to civilian led democracy was destroyed when the army and RSF staged a coup in 2021. The ensuing civil war has seen the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) fighting against the paramilitary group Rapid Support Forces (RSF). The war has left millions displaced and an estimated 15,000 civilians dead. Over 8.4 million people, including two million children, have been forced to flee their homes in the wake of the conflict.
Sudan has also been experiencing deadly outbreaks of diseases such as cholera, measles, and malaria. Meanwhile, about 65 percent of the population lacks access to healthcare and between 70-80% of hospitals in conflict zones are no longer functional due to air raids. Several efforts are under way to attempt to bring the war in Sudan to an end, but their lack of success has been linked to rifts and competing interests between the mediating countries such as Russia, the US, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
For more updates, articles, in-depth analysis and weekly reviews on Global News, click here.
Stay informed with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to continue in helping to protect democracy and empower citizenship.
The Perilous Reality of Palestinian Villages in the West Bank
The Perilous Reality of Palestinian Villages in the West Bank
Foreign Policy Brief #137 | By: Aziza Taslaq | April 17, 2024
Featured Photo: www.apnews.com
__________________________________
Amid the ongoing chaotic situation in Gaza, a disturbing trend has emerged in the West Bank. Israeli settlers are targeting Palestinian villages in a series of attacks that resemble some of the darkest moments in the history of the conflict. These attacks involve vandalism, arson, and intimidation, causing harassment and fear to arise in an already volatile region.
The tragic fate of the Dawabsheh family in 2015 is a terrible reminder of the consequences of unchecked militancy. A nasty fire broke out in the small West Bank village of Duma on July 31, 2015. The perpetrators set the Dawabsheh family home on fire, killing 18-month-old Ali Dawabsheh instantly. His parents, Saad and Reham Dawabsheh suffered severe burns and injuries, and both died within weeks of the attack. The terrible news devastated the Dawabsheh family and destroyed their community.
The wounds of this tragedy have not yet healed, and the latest wave of attacks adds to the suffering and trauma it continues to inflict on the Palestinian people. As violence increases in the region, it is important for all affected to remember the human toll of such atrocities and work towards a peaceful and just solution.
In April 2024, an attention-grabbing conflict arose when an Israeli shepherd disappeared without a trace. The incident left the community confused and upset, leaving many questions unanswered. His body was later found lying motionless on the ground. The cause of his death, however, remained a complete mystery, leaving all involved with more questions than answers.
Villages in the northern West Bank are once again being targeted by settlers with brutal violence, perpetuating the ongoing conflict in the region. Areas such as Duma, Mughayyer, Turmus Ayya, Attara Abu Falah, Bitten, Deer Dabwan near Ramallah city, and Qusra and Hawwara near Nablus city, have been turned into war zones, threatening the physical security, overall security, and sense of belonging of citizens The trends remind us of the revelation it is a nightmare where houses and cars are on fire, leaving behind a trail of destruction that is a zombie movie It brings to mind.
The Israeli settlers, who are armed and protected by the IDF, have attacked Palestinians, resulting in the loss of their lives, homes, lands, and even families. Despite having no weapons to defend themselves, Palestinians have resorted to using only stones. In one instance, a settler attack on Al-Mughayyer village resulted in the death of an 18-year-old young man, 18 injuries, and the burning of over 10 houses and a number of cars.
Anwar, a 30-year-old young man from Duma village who was working hard to build his dream house and start a family with his wife, suffered a similar fate. In one of the settler attacks, his home was burned down, and all his efforts were in vain. Anwar found himself unable to make a media appearance following the tragic event, preventing him from describing the suffering he had experienced in his life.
The conflict in the West Bank has led to severe restrictions on Palestinians’ freedom of movement, making their daily lives more difficult. Since the conflict began on October 7, Palestinians have faced tremendous hardship daily through day programs, including remote studying for students and remote working for companies. These measures have not only made life difficult for Palestinians but have also highlighted the far-reaching impact of the conflict beyond the immediate violence. The restrictions prevent access to essential supplies.
The conflict has also caused tremendous psychological stress and trauma to people, especially children, who live in constant fear of violence. The situation remains dire, and urgent action is needed to solve the humanitarian crisis and establish a lasting peace. The war against Gaza continues as settlers once again target villages in the northern West Bank with horrific brutality. Areas such as Duma, Mughayr, Abu Falah, and Hawwara have been turned into war zones, threatening the physical security, overall security, and sense of belonging of citizens. The trends remind us of the revelation that it is a nightmare where houses and cars are on fire, leaving behind a trail of destruction, which is a zombie movie it brings to mind.
In the middle of the current crisis in Gaza, it is important not to forget the suffering of Palestinians in the West Bank. The international community must strongly condemn attacks on Palestinian villages and hold them accountable for their actions. It is important to address the root causes of conflict and prioritize the rights and dignity of all people involved. Justice and accountability must triumph over impunity and violence.
There are few signs of hope in the middle of despair and darkness. Their calm strength and determination under pressure are to be commended. We must ensure that their voices are heard as they call for justice, peace, and a better future for all who live in this country.
For more articles and in-depth analysis on the conflict in Gaza, 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.
Evan Gershkovich’s Story
Evan Gershkovich’s Story
Foreign Policy Brief #136 | By: Yelena Korshunov | April 17, 2024
Featured Photo: www.cbc.ca
__________________________________
On March 29th, The Wall Street Journal came out with a blank white page where there was supposed to be an article by Evan Gershkovich, an American journalist imprisoned in Russia on accusations of espionage. Gershkovich became the first Western journalist charged with espionage since the end of the Cold War. The White House condemned his arrest, and the WSJ (Wall Street Journal) categorically denied the accusation, while multiple world and Russian journalists demanded his immediate release.
Evan Gershkovich moved to Russia at the end of 2017, having previously worked for almost two years at The New York Times. He was a journalist for The Moscow Times and worked for Agence France-Presse. In January 2022 he started working at The WSJ. After Russia’s attack on Ukraine on February 24, 2022, he moved to London, but often returned to Russia for journalist reports. On March 29, he was detained during his work trip in Russia, in the city of Yekaterinburg. The next day the Lefortovo Court of Moscow arrested the American journalist for two months on charges of espionage, sending him to a pre-trial detention center. Since then, his holding period has been regularly extended, and nothing has moved on the merits of the case.
Evan’s parents, Ella Millman and Mikhail Gershkovich, say that they and Evan write to each other every week. He plays chess in letters with his father, and on March 8th had even managed to deliver flowers to his mother and sister. Evan shares a cell measuring 3 by 4 meters (9.8 x 13 ft.) with another prisoner. His parents describe the cell as “a very small, very isolated room with a small window.” “We know that it takes a lot of courage and effort to stay focused, exercise, meditate, read books, write letters and inspire us to hope for the best,” Evan’s father shared with the press. Gershkovich’s close friend Peter Sauer, a correspondent for The Guardian, assures that Evan tries to keep himself occupied throughout the day and maintain a routine. “He reads, writes, and exercises, so by the end of the day he feels like he’s had a productive day,” says Sauer. According to him, in the letters he still sees “the same Evan – full of humor and curiosity.” Evan’s friend Polina Evanova, a correspondent for the Financial Times, says that the re-election of Vladimir Putin as president was “a tragedy for him”.
After Gershkovich’s arrest, the WSJ wrote that Russia’s president Putin “strongly hinted” that he was open to offers to exchange the journalist. However, there are no Russian prisoners in American jails on similar charges. In early February 2024, a former Fox News host, Tucker Carlson arrived in Moscow to interview Vladimir Putin. According to the WSJ, Carlson told the Russian president’s aides that he plans to “pressure” Putin to release Gershkovich “here and now.” According to Carlson himself, an official close to Putin called it “a great idea” that “could provoke a positive response.” In the interview with Putin, Carlson several times asked him about the fate of Gershkovich. The Russia’s president did not give a direct answer, but said that he “does not exclude” Gershkovich’s return home”, and then spoke about “a man who is serving a sentence in a country allied with the United States” and who “for patriotic reasons eliminated a bandit in one of the European capitals” referring to alleged former FSB officer Vadim Krasikov.
Krasikov was sentenced to life in prison and is serving his sentence in Germany. WSJ and several other Western publications have found that Germany and the United States have begun to discuss the possibility of a deal in which Berlin could give up Krasikov in exchange for Alexei Navalny, Evan Gershkovich, and former US Marine Paul Whelan, who is also accused of espionage and has already been sentenced by a Russian court to 16 years in a penal colony where prisoners are kept in hard conditions combining both penal detention and compulsory work. Vladimir Putin’s press secretary Dmitry Peskov then said that on prisoner exchange cases between Russia and the United States, certain progress is being made but it must “be carried out in absolute silence.” Peskov ignored a question about the date of Gershkovich’s trial.
On the anniversary of the detention of Evan Gershkovich in Russia, President Joe Biden promised to continue working towards his return home. In a statement posted on the White House website, Biden said that “journalism is not a crime, and Evan traveled to Russia, doing his job as a reporter and risking his safety to shine a light on the truth about Russia’s brutal aggression against Ukraine.” The president also promised that the United States will continue to condemn Russia’s “horrific attempts to use Americans as bargaining chips.” According to Biden, Washington will continue to respond to these Russian actions. He added that “we will vigorously oppose anyone who attacks the press and harasses journalists. Speaking about Gershkovich and Whelan, more akin to hostages than prisoners, Biden promised that the United States “will not stop working to bring them home.”
Russia’s famous writer Fyodor Dostoyevsky once wrote, “To live without hope is to cease to live.” With many others, I hope that one day we will bring them home.
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.
‘BURN BOOK’ Review: Kara Swisher’s Memoir Covering the Tech Industry and the Billionaires It Made
‘BURN BOOK’ Review: Kara Swisher’s Memoir Covering the Tech Industry and the Billionaires It Made
Technology Policy Brief #110 | By: Mindy Spatt | April 16, 2024
Featured Photo: www.thelettertwo.com
__________________________________
Kara Swisher’s ‘Burn Book’, subtitled “A Tech Love Story” recounts her glamorous and successful career covering the tech industry. It is filled with interesting tidbits of conversations and her insights into the personalities of Elon Musk, Steve Jobs and other tech celebrities, but fails to address the political power the industry has amassed, or how to rein it in.
ANALYSIS
When I went searching for Kara Swisher’s new book in San Francisco and found it was sold out at all of the bookshops I normally frequent I imagined it was filled with elegant prose, smoking hot exposes and salacious anecdotes. When I finally got my hands on a copy I found it a bit disappointing. Much of the book describes already published interviews and repeats fairly well known critiques of Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg, and the evolution of Steve Jobs.
Swisher starts us off with a meeting that occurred at Trump Tower shortly after the disastrous 2016 election. This meeting, she states, was when things “went off the rails.” On finding out that Elon Musk, Peter Theil, Jeff Bezos, the CEOs of Oracle and Microsoft and many others were going to meet with Donald Trump Swisher phones them all and explains why it would be a bad idea to do so. By this point in her career Swisher is so connected to the industry she covers that she’s not only asking questions of the tech industry titans, she’s offering them her mostly unsolicited advice.
She correctly concludes the reason industry leaders didn’t take her advice on not taking the meeting was because they care far more about making money than they do about Trump’s immigration policies or misogyny. But why is Swisher surprised? They had already become a well-funded lobbying juggernaut fighting vociferously against any form of regulation or consumer protection. Wasn’t it off the rails when they crushed all attempts to regulate them? Or when Zuckerberg and the other young, clueless and privileged tech bros became the billionaires?
Swisher doesn’t return to that moment or that meeting. Only at the end of the book does she touch on the need for the tech industry to be “reined in”, but despite her insider knowledge and expertise she doesn’t say a word about how to do that, or call out their lobbying efforts and influence. Since she notes in the final chapter she’s decamped Silicon Valley for Washington DC, this would seem like a logical direction for her to go in.
To her credit, Swisher acknowledges that she is ambitious and, as she puts it, “a capitalist.” And she’s justifiably proud of her success in an area of journalism that was almost exclusively male when she entered it. She describes the genesis of her popular and profitable Recode conferences and other projects and acknowledges that she became an insider, enjoying the status and perks that came with that status while remaining confrontative and incisive in her work.
One insider anecdote she does describe isn’t salacious but gives a visual image to a problem she raises repeatedly, the immaturity of the young techno billionaires. At a baby shower for Google co-founder Sergey Brin, guests wore diapers (over their clothes) and baby hats, and refreshments included “an ice sculpture of a woman whose breast was oozing White Russians…..” But that was then, 2008 to be exact, and this is now. She doesn’t say whether they’ve changed or matured, especially after becoming parents, or, for that matter, whether she has. In the few somewhat offhand references to her personal life, she mentions 2 teenage sons and two younger children, but there’s nothing about balancing those responsibilities with a high-powered job or her home life. After seeing how phenomenally well this book is selling, perhaps she’ll write something more juicy in the future.
Engagement Resources:
- “Burn Book: A Tech Love Story” by Kara Swisher, Simon and Schuster 2024.
- An Ugly Truth, Inside Facebook’s Battle for Domination By: Sheera Frenkel & Cecilia Kang, Harper Collins 2024.
- Like War, The Weaponization of Social Media By: P. W. Singer & Emerson T. Brooking, Harper Collins, 2018.
Join our community of informed citizens and stay connected with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. Your support is absolutely vital in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you resonate with our mission and value our content, we invite you to make a donation today. Together, let’s continue to protect democracy and empower citizenship!
An Unconstitutional and Dangerous State Trend: Chaplains as School Counselors
An Unconstitutional and Dangerous State Trend: Chaplains as School Counselors
Civil Rights Policy Brief #223 | By: Rodney A. Maggay | April 10, 2024
Featured Photo: www.expressnews.com
__________________________________
Policy Summary: In May 2023, the Texas Legislature passed Senate Bill 763, which permitted school districts in the state to use unlicensed religious chaplains in lieu of traditional trained and credentialed school counselors. The bill was finally passed after attempts to amend the bill failed. The defeated amendments were a requirement that the chaplains be credentialed to provide support services (similar to requirements when chaplains work in prisons), a requirement that the chaplains be barred from trying to convert a student from one religion to another and a requirement that the student’s parents provide consent for the student to speak with a chaplain. The Texas bill required all of the school districts in Texas to vote whether their district would allow religious chaplains to provide counseling services in their school districts. In an unexpected outcome, twenty – five of the largest school districts in Texas, accounting for more than one – third of the public school students in Texas, rejected the chaplaincy program for their school district.
However, the bill from Texas inspired similar legislation. In thirteen states – Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma and Utah – similar school chaplaincy bills have been introduced. A common feature of these bills is that these religious chaplains would be permitted to handle counseling services even if they do not possess the same qualifications and credentials of traditional school counselors and other school support staff.
In Florida in March 2024, the state legislature passed their version of the school chaplaincy program bill. Governor Ron DeSantis is expected to sign the bill. In response, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) marshalled an effort to push back on the Florida bill in conjunction with other faith groups and community leaders. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE
Policy Analysis: The state bills inspired by Texas Senate bill 763 are naked unconstitutional attempts to try to force religion, specifically Christianity, on to impressionable public school students.
Many of these state legislators have been emboldened by recent Supreme Court cases that have been more accommodating to religion than in decades, even centuries, past. The perception is that states and legislators can now try to pass more religious based bills that favor, and even promote Christianity, because of the belief that the U.S. Supreme Court will not strike down these laws.
Even with the turn towards more religious accommodation at the Supreme Court, it is still a fundamental principle of the First Amendment that there is a separation of church and state that cannot be invaded by government entities. Rachel Laser, CEO and president of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State responded to these bills by stating, “The constitutional promise of church-state separation requires that students and parents – not public school officials, state legislatures or government-imposed religious leaders – get to make their own decisions about religion.” By allowing unlicensed chaplains into the classroom there is a very real possibility that these chaplains will take advantage of students who need legitimate support services for mental health and social issues. The priority and purpose of these chaplains would be to impose their religious belief on the student or converting the student to the chaplain’s preferred religion. This is a situation that the First Amendment was designed to prevent against – the imposition of religious beliefs sponsored by the government. These bills are likely unconstitutional based on the centuries of tradition and history of the First Amendment’s religious clauses.
State legislators have tried to defend the school chaplaincy bills in their state with the argument that students who are exposed to religion will be better off to handle many of the emerging issues of the day. But this rationale is at best vague. There are no specifics as to how a religious person would best be positioned to help a student facing a mental health crisis, academic issues or bullying situations. A feature of these bills that is receiving much of the criticism is that it allows anyone to be a school chaplain without any requirement of being trained and credentialed as a traditional school counselor. The chaplain would be placed in a position to provide school counseling services. This is a scenario that can escalate very quickly into a dangerous situation.
Simply identifying as a religious person does not give the person the tools or know how to manage an ongoing mental health crisis. Nor does it qualify the religious person to handle the complexities of gender identity issues. Especially when a good number of religious persons are opposed to LGBQT persons. The lack of any training requirements or counseling credentials is going to create an environment where someone who is least qualified to manage a crisis will end up “counseling” students in a manner that is ill – suited to bring about the best outcome. The perception of these bills shows that these legislators are not interested in pursuing the best possible outcome for students struggling with issues in school but are instead trying to impose religious viewpoints on as many students as possible, regardless of what the student wants or desires. Some of the biggest school districts in Texas have already rejected Senate Bill 763 and it is hoped that the similar bills in other states will be rejected as well. LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
- Tallahasee Democrat – article illustrating the arguments for and against the Florida school chaplaincy bill, including whether Satanists would be allowed to provide counseling services.
- American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) – statement from non – profit group explaining the legal and practical flaws in school chaplaincy bills.
- Austin – American Statesman – article detailing why some religious groups in Texas oppose the school chaplaincy program bill.
This brief was compiled by Rod Maggay. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief, please contact rodwood@email.com.
Stay in-the-know with the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. We depend on support from readers like you to aide in protecting fearless independent journalism, so please consider donating to keep democracy alive today!
Former President Trump’s Criminal Court Cases: Taking Stock
Former President Trump’s Criminal Court Cases: Taking Stock
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #127 | By: Courtney Denning | April 09, 2024
Featured Photo: www.washingtonpost.com
__________________________________
Former President and current expected Republican nominee, Donald J. Trump, is the defendant in multiple civil and criminal court cases across the country. This is the first time that a former US president has been charged with a criminal offense.
These trials have received ongoing national attention. Here is an overview of the current state of each case:
New York Civil Court Case
On Feb. 16, 2024 a judge ruled that Trump must pay a $454 million penalty for lying on financial statements, claiming that he was more wealthy than he was in order to make loans and deals. Trump appealed the case, claiming that the judge committed errors and acted outside of his jurisdiction. That appeal hearing is expected to take place in September, during the final weeks of the presidential campaign.
As a condition for allowing the appeal, Trump was required to put up $175 million in bail money in order to stop the state from seizing his assets. Trump paid this on April 1. However, the state’s Attorney General has requested that this bond be “justified,” and has asked Trump to prove that he has the money and assets required to pay it.
Judge in the case: Arthur Engoron
Current trial date: Unscheduled, expected Sept. 2024
Amount of Trump delay time requested and granted, to date: Appeal will delay the potential penalty by 6 months, granted
Key legal issue decided: Did Trump lie on his financial records? Did Judge Engoron handle the trial properly?
Penalty: $363.9 million plus interest, totaling $454 million at the time of the initial ruling
Odds of conviction: Currently found liable, pending appeal
New York Criminal Court Case
Trump was indicted on March 30, 2023 for allegedly falsifying business records in order to pay hush money to two women whom he reportedly had extramarital affairs with. Prosecution claims this happened in 2016 as a way to protect Trump’s public image during his run for presidency.
Throughout the course of the trial, Trump’s lawyers have used what many consider to be stalling tactics, including calling for the case to be moved from a state court to a federal one. Trump’s lawyers also asked that the judge presiding over the case be replaced due to suspicion of bias. Both of these requests were denied.
However, on March 15, Trump’s lawyers asked for the trial to be postponed due to an influx of new evidence, which was granted.
As part of his efforts to undermine the charges against him, Trump repeatedly criticized people involved in the case, causing the judge to issue a gag order on him on March 26. This order was expanded on April 1 to also include the families of those involved in the case following a statement made by Trump about the judge’s daughter on his social media site, Truth Social.
Trump requested that the trial be postponed until after the Supreme Court hears his arguments for presidential immunity on April 25. However, the judge rejected this request and is scheduled to begin hearing the case on April 15.
Judge in the case: Juan M. Merchan
Current trial date: April 15
Amount of delay time requested by and granted to Trump, to date: Requested 21 days, granted
Key legal issue to be decided: Did Trump falsify business records in order to bury allegations of extramarital affairs?
Potential penalty: Maximum sentence of four years in prison
Odds of conviction:
DC Criminal Court Case
In August, Trump was charged with election interference for his alleged involvement in the January 6 Capital riot. Prosecutors claim that he intentionally disseminated lies about the “stolen election” and attempted to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.
Much like the New York criminal case, the judge in this trial issued a gag order on Trump to prevent him from making disparaging public comments about people involved in the trial. Trump has also claimed that as a former president, he is immune from trial. These claims were dismissed by both the presiding judge and the appeals court, but the Supreme Court agreed to hear arguments over whether Trump is entitled to immunity on the week of April 22.
Judge in the case: Tanya Chutkan
Current trial date: Unscheduled, awaiting immunity decision
Amount of delay time requested by and granted to Trump, to date: Requested indefinite delay, 36 days granted thus far
Key legal issue to be decided: Did Trump interfere in a federal election?
Potential penalty: Maximum sentence of 20 years in prison
Odds of conviction:
Georgia Criminal Court Case
Trump has also been charged with election interference in Georgia over claims that he meddled in the process of choosing electors and harassed election workers. Some of these charges were filed under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act while the rest are other assorted conspiracy charges. The charges were filed on Aug. 14 and Trump’s mugshot was released as a result of this case the following week.
Four of Trump’s associates who were also indicted in this trial have pleaded guilty to the charges, reaching a plea deal. In January, reports of an inappropriate romantic relationship involving the District Attorney caused a special prosecutor to eventually step down from his position in March. During this conflict, three of Trump’s charges were dropped, but the District Attorney was allowed to continue in her prosecution of the case. Trump has asked the court of appeals to review this decision, claiming that this inappropriate romantic relationship still presented a conflict of interest even after one party dismissed himself.
Judge in the case: Scott McAfee
Current trial date: Unscheduled
Amount of delay time requested by and granted to Trump, to date: Requested indefinite delay, granted thus far
Key legal issue to be decided: Did Trump interfere in Georgia’s presidential election?
Potential penalty: Maximum sentence of 20 years in prison
Odds of conviction:
Florida Criminal Court Case
The last case against Trump is the claim that he was harboring classified documents at his estate in Mar-a-Lago. These charges were filed in June and additional accounts of conspiring to cover up this alleged crime were filed in July.
The hearings for this case are scheduled for May 20, but delays are expected according to the presiding judge. There has been some controversy over the jury because the case is scheduled to pull from a pool of jurors that reside in a county that heavily favored Trump in the 2020 presidential election.
Judge in the case: Aileen Cannon
Current trial date: May 20
Amount of delay time requested by and granted to Trump, to date: None requested thus far
Key legal issue to be decided: Did Trump keep classified documents at his private estate and attempt to hide his possession of them?
Potential penalty: Maximum sentence of 10 years in prison per count
Odds of conviction: Likelihood of Trump serving the full sentence is low, even if he is found guilty of all 30 charges
Analysis:
Because these cases are being heard during a presidential election season, their results have the potential to significantly affect the outcome of the 2024 presidential election. The numerous appeals and postponings in each of these trials is likely part of an effort by Trump to delay the verdicts, buying him more time to secure the presidency and pardon himself if he reaches office again. And while political motives should not interfere with criminal court case proceedings, reasonable concerns over the trials must be considered by the judicial branch in order to maintain their credibility. Reaching a verdict in each trial must come quickly but cannot come at the expense of due diligence.
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.
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
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
Environment Policy Brief #166 | By: Todd Broadman | April 08, 2024
Featured Photo sourced from: www.vox.com
__________________________________
A portion of the already approved Bipartisan Infrastructure Law ($430 million) and the Inflation Reduction Act ($5.46 billion) has been directed by President Biden to a program that aims to “accelerate the emissions reductions of heavy-emitting industries.” This program will be managed by the Department of Energy (DOE) under Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm. Funding for these carbon-reducing projects took the form of competitive grants totaling around $6 billion dollars. Awards have been decided, and though the money will go towards a wide range of industry sectors, the common thread is that in each case the DOE deemed decarbonization as “hard-to-abate.”
Prominent amongst the grantees are steel, aluminum and cement firms, representing industries that contribute approximately 25% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. Under the DOE, this Industrial Demonstrations Program has related goals to “create healthier communities” and to “help strengthen and secure America’s global leadership in clean manufacturing for decades to come.” To further guide these goals, the DOE has assigned three of its divisions to oversee implementation: Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations (OCED), the Office of Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains (MESC), and the Industrial Efficiency and Decarbonization Office (IEDO).
Not only did this funding witness uncharacteristic bipartisan approval, it went further in winning widespread support from both industry and environmental groups. “I think the United States can be a leader here,” said Mike Ireland, president and CEO of the Portland Cement Association, a non-profit that promotes cement and concrete. He also anticipates that the resulting technology has significant export potential. Christina Theodoridi, industrial policy director at the Natural Resources Defense Council, was equally optimistic: “If done right, these projects can put us on the path to cleaner production of core products of the modern economy, while spurring the creation of good jobs.”
Uniquely challenging is the aluminum sector. The U.S. imports 40% of its aluminum, much of it from China. The manufacturing process is extremely energy intensive. There is even an “aluminum director,” Annie Sartor, at Industrial Labs, an organization that lobbies for green technology. Sartor explained that “these [aluminum] facilities have historically been located near cheap fossil energy. And today, 21st century coal, or coal and gas, are no longer cheapest.” The largest funding allocation is going to Century Aluminum, $500 million to build a 100% clean energy aluminum plant, and once in operation is expected to double domestic production.
Before declaring bankruptcy, the Magnitude 7 aluminum company was the largest single user of electricity in the state of Missouri. Their financially turbulent history highlights the risks of trying to keep these large industries afloat. 40% of the cost of aluminum is attributed to the cost of electricity. The U.S. cannot compete with lower-cost energy producers overseas. Current domestic production of aluminum is less than 20% of what it was in 1980. The cost of energy, in this instance, seems a more critical factor than the CO2 emissions associated with its manufacture. These economics are revealing, especially given that 2 percent of the world’s carbon emissions are attributed to making aluminum.
ANALYSIS
The Biden administration scores bipartisan points with this program and can claim progress towards its goal of reducing carbon emissions 50% by 2030. Underlying political support for the $6 billion expenditure of taxpayer dollars though, is reminiscent of Pentagon military contractor allocations in so far as they are sold as net job creators. This intent is echoed by Lane Boldman who heads Kentucky Conservation Committee, who is pitching his state to Century Aluminum: “Kentucky has always represented some of the hardest working Americans when it comes to industry and energy. We are hopeful that their new facility will find a home in Kentucky, and provide good jobs along with healthier air and water quality while supporting a critical industry for the state.”
President Joe Biden did not miss the opportunity to secure United Steelworker union support with employment promises – a 1,000 new jobs – tied to this decarbonization program. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm went as far as to say that the new low-carbon technologies are “replicable,” “scalable,” and will “set a new gold standard for clean manufacturing in the United States and around the world.” Followed by a litany of unverifiable claims made by White House climate adviser Ali Zaidi that this funding “aims to eliminate 14 million metric tons of pollution each year, equivalent to taking about 3 million cars off the road.”
Among the 33 companies that were approved for funding (and not mentioned above) are:
- Constellium in Ravenswood, West Virginia, who makes parts for cars and planes, is going to operate a first-of-its-kind zero-carbon aluminum casting plant, and install low-emission furnaces that can use clean fuels such as hydrogen.
- Kraft Heinz will install heat pumps, electric heaters and electric boilers to decarbonize food production at 10 facilities, including in Holland, Michigan.
- Cleveland-Cliffs Steel Corporation in Middletown, Ohio, will retire one blast furnace, install two electric furnaces, and use hydrogen-based ironmaking technology. The project aims to eliminate 1 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions each year from the largest supplier of steel to the U.S. automotive industry.
- Heidelberg Materials US, Inc. will build a system that captures and stores carbon underground at its plant in Mitchell, Indiana. The project aims to capture at least 95% of the carbon dioxide released by the cement plant, which will prevent 2 million tons of carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere each year.
- SSAB AB received the largest award, $500 million, to build the first commercial-scale facility in the world to make fossil-fuel-free steel using 100% hydrogen in Perry County, Mississippi.
- Vale SA received as much as $283 million to build a plant on the US Gulf Coast that makes iron ore briquettes with less industrial heat than traditional pellets.
Important to note that along with the patriotic claims of America leading the globe in efforts to decarbonize, some of the largest grantees are not American companies. SSAB (Sweden) and Heidelberg Materials (Germany) and Vale SA (Brazil) are not headquartered in the U.S. and do most of their manufacturing in other parts of the globe. To add further perspective, recipients of taxpayer dollars under this program such as Exxon and Kraft Heinz, have substantial profits and can afford to make these green investments without taxpayer funding. Others, like startup Brimstone cement, are well-backed by venture capital funding (Bill Gates among them). Certainly, a boon for Wall Street which has been pressing for federal funding to back their investments.
As a fundamental policy question: why are billions being directed at individual company manufacturing processes rather than into the generation of renewable energy itself? Are there not jobs there as well?
Engagement Resources:
- ESG Today https://www.esgtoday.com/ dedicated to covering Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) issues for investors.
- GreenBiz https://www.greenbiz.com/ a passionate media team that builds and empowers communities to confront the threats of climate change and solve the thorniest challenges of our time
- Natural Resources Defense Council https://www.nrdc.org/ combines the power of more than 3 million members and online activists with the expertise of some 700 scientists, lawyers, and other environmental specialists to confront the climate crisis, protect the planet’s wildlife and wild places, and to ensure the rights of all people to clean air, clean water, and healthy communities.
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.