JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
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.
Do States Have the Right to Deport Immigrants? A Look at Texas Immigration Law
Brief #160 – Social Justice Policy Brief
by: Devyne Byrd
Texas’s controversial immigration law, SB4, raises questions about states’ authority in deportation matters. Amidst legal battles and federal objections, the law sets a precedent for immigration policy across the nation.
The Chilling Effect of Republican Education Policy
Brief #90 – Education Policy Brief
by: Rudolph Lurz
This article delves into the chilling effect of Republican education policies, particularly exemplified by initiatives such as Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” law. It explores how vague legislation is causing educators and students to self-regulate their speech and behavior, stifling freedom of expression in classrooms and beyond.
Former President Donald Trump’s Gag Order
Brief #126 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by: Arvind Salem
In a groundbreaking development, a judge has issued a gag order on former President Donald Trump, prohibiting him from publicly attacking individuals involved in his upcoming trial. This order comes amid concerns over Trump’s history of making threatening statements against those associated with his legal cases.
Who Attacked The Moscow Concert?
Brief #134 – Foreign Policy Brief
by: Arvind Salem
The Moscow concert hall fell victim to a devastating attack, leaving a trail of destruction and loss. Identified as the deadliest terrorist incident in Russia in over a decade, the assault has sparked widespread concern and speculation about the perpetrators and their motives.
Police Reform in Two Cities: Baltimore and Minneapolis
Police Reform in Two Cities: Baltimore and Minneapolis
Social Justice Policy Brief #155 | By: Inijah Quadri | February 06, 2024
Featured Photo taken from: www.cnn.com
__________________________________
In the United States, the path to police reform has been a complex and diverse journey, significantly influenced by local contexts and challenges. By examining the police reform efforts in two cities—Baltimore and Minneapolis—we can gain insights into the differences in approach and outcomes in these cities.
Baltimore: A Model of Comprehensive Reform
In Baltimore, following the death of Freddie Gray and the resulting civil unrest in 2015, the city entered into a consent decree with the Department of Justice in 2017. This agreement mandated a series of reforms aimed at addressing the use of excessive force, racial profiling, and overall accountability within the Baltimore Police Department (BPD).
The BPD has since implemented significant changes, including overhauling its transport vehicles for detainee safety, improving data collection and auditing practices, and updating policies for detainee searches. These reforms have led to a noticeable reduction in detainee injuries and an overall enhancement in the accountability of officers. The department has also seen a reduction in the use of serious force and improvements in responses to behavioral health crises. Entry requirements for joining the force now emphasize values such as integrity, respect, and commitment to community-oriented policing. The training for recruits and serving officers includes an increased focus on de-escalation, crisis intervention, and bias-free policing.
Minneapolis: Challenges and Progress in Reform
Contrastingly, Minneapolis’s path to police reform has been marked by challenges. The killing of George Floyd brought international attention to the Minneapolis Police Department (MPD), leading to calls for drastic reform. After Floyd’s death, the Minnesota Department of Human Rights conducted a two-year investigation into the Minneapolis Police Department, revealing a pattern of racial discrimination, racist language, and excessive force. Significant steps have been made, including the appointment of a Commissioner of Community Safety and a police chief experienced in implementing consent decrees. Proposed reforms include limiting the use of tasers, mandatory documentation for stops, and the prohibition of certain traffic stops. The city also plans to improve its field training program and create a publicly searchable database of use-of-force incidents.
Comparative Outcomes and Crime Rates
In terms of outcomes, Baltimore’s efforts appear to have made more significant strides in reforming its police practices compared to Minneapolis. However, both cities continue to face challenges in fully realizing the goals of their respective reform initiatives.
According to a report by the Baltimore Police, reform efforts have resulted in a 16% decrease in violent crime since 2018. The report also notes that the city has seen a reduction in the number of police-involved shootings and civilian complaints. Even murder rates, while still high in comparison to other cities, are dropping when compared to past years in Baltimore. However, some reports also acknowledge that the city still faces challenges, including a strained relationship between the police and the community and a lack of resources and support for the reform process.
In Minneapolis, while significant steps are being taken toward police reform, the city continues to face several challenges as most of these changes are still in their infancy. Even given the allocation of $16 million for police reform in the 2024 budget, including the hiring of new police oversight workers, there are ongoing issues that need to be addressed. One of the main problems is the high crime rate, particularly violent crimes. The city has struggled with instances of aggravated assaults and homicides, which remain high compared to its decade-on-decade records. These issues highlight the ongoing need for effective policing strategies that also respect community relations and civil rights.
While these cities are by no means perfect, other US cities can embark on effective police reform by focusing on a few key strategies. Embracing external oversight through consent decrees can provide the necessary accountability. Reforming core police policies, particularly around the use of force and community interaction, is essential. Additionally, fostering deeper community engagement ensures that reforms are responsive to local needs. Finally, investing in robust training and support for officers can help inculcate a culture of respectful, community-oriented policing. These steps, rooted in transparency and continuous evaluation, offer a blueprint for meaningful and sustainable police reform.
Engagement Resources
- Campaign Zero (campaignzero.org): Provides data-driven policy solutions to end police violence in America.
- National Police Accountability Project (nlg-npap.org): Dedicated to ending law enforcement abuse through litigation and public education.
- ACLU Policing (aclu.org): Advocates for a fair and effective law enforcement system.
- Center for Policing Equity (policingequity.org): Produces analyses identifying and reducing the causes of racial disparities in policing.
- Law Enforcement Action Partnership (lawenforcementactionpartnership.org): Advocates for effective and just law enforcement policies.
- For a comprehensive look at how states are expanding their role in regulating law enforcement use of force and other reforms, see the National Conference of State Legislatures report: Law Enforcement Legislation | Significant Trends 2022
Want to read more about this? Read related articles here. 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.
A Primer on Our Housing Crisis
A Primer on Our Housing Crisis
Economic Policy Brief #59 | By: Devyne Byrd| February 06, 2024
Featured Photo: www.inthesetimes.com
__________________________________
Although the United States is a global economic force, its economic prosperity has not extended to those citizens who are suffering from a dire housing crisis. The housing crisis has been exacerbated by insufficient housing supply, soaring prices and interest rates, stringent financing, and the continuing impact of COVID-19. As wages have not risen to align with these issues, many Americans have been priced out of both the homebuying and rental process, leading to mass evictions, foreclosures, and homelessness.
Extremely low-income families are at the greatest risk with more than 7 million affordable homes missing from the market according to the National Low Income Housing Coalition. Their Out of Reach report for 2023 emphasizes the gap between the cost of two-bedroom rentals and the wages of Americans in the same area, with sixty percent of all workers earning an hourly wage that is insufficient. Urban and metropolitan areas face the largest rents, with gentrification increasing the prices and competition for homes. This leads to low earners devoting a significant portion of their income to rent, above the 30 percent guideline that HUD suggests. With rent prices continuing to rise, this cost burden becomes more unattainable for the average renter.
Analysis
Ramping up affordable housing options is the first step to alleviating the growing housing crisis. The primary ways to increase affordable housing options are through rent control, increased public housing construction, and government subsidies. These steps would allow low-income families access to housing within their means and prevent homelessness and financial instability. Additionally, enacting policies that prevent short-term rentals would put millions of units back on the market. These units would then be available to tenants in the communities and lower prices in the market.
A cohesive effort of federal, state, and local governments is needed to ensure the viability of policies enacted to alleviate the crisis. This would encompass federal funding that the state uses to implement affordable housing projects and tenant protections and provide legal support against constitutional challenges. By increasing funding for a larger housing supply, local governments could avoid more litigious forms of action such as ordinances on property restrictions. For example, in 2016 Austin, Texas passed an ordinance to ban short-term rentals that weren’t owner-occupied, citing limiting housing availability for locals and displacement of families as the justification. In a city known for high housing costs and rapid gentrification, this was a move lauded by many as proactively seeking to protect its population. However, the ordinance was struck down by a federal judge in August of 2023 who found it in violation of the dormant commerce clause. The dormant commerce clause is the legal doctrine that states cannot pass laws or regulations that burden interstate commerce. In this case, the city would be limiting out-of-state owners’s ability to make money off of their property even if they did not reside in the city. To circumvent future setbacks such as these, federal and state funding is necessary to give local authorities the means to alleviate the housing crisis and directly provide for low-income residents instead of using restrictions that run the risk of being challenged for constitutionality.
California has had success with implementing legislation that increases housing developments and protects low-income tenants. In 2019 the California Senate passed the Housing Act of 2019 which temporarily suspended local restrictions so that housing development could be increased. They also passed ordinances easing zoning and density measures so that affordable housing could be built in more places and high-density housing projects could quickly be started. Although housing remains a significant issue throughout the state, the successful litigation has assisted with ramping up housing supply and alleviating the pressure on low-income citizens.
As Americans continue to struggle to find safe and stable housing, government intervention is necessary to protect low-income residents’ viability. With the inflationary market and economic hardships, the country is facing, the government has a duty to enact policies that support its most vulnerable populations and ensure housing.
Engagement Resources
- Out of Reach Report – Research by the National Low Income Housing Coalition that shows the gap between wages and housing affordability on a state-by-state level.
- Center on Budget and Policy Priorities – An article on proposed solutions to the affordable housing crisis, including rental assistance and the housing supply.
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.
A Hard Road for a Young Palestinian Mother
A Hard Road for a Young Palestinian Mother
Foreign Policy Brief #118 | By: Aziza Taslaq | February 02, 2024
Featured Photo taken from: www.stopthewall.org
__________________________________
In the heart of Bethlehem, where echoes of history resonate through the cobblestone streets, lived Salma, a 33-year-old mother devoted to her young daughter, Sara. Salma’s life, once painted with the hues of contentment, took a dark turn on April 17th, 2023 – a date etched in her family’s memory as Prisoner’s Day.
Salma, a proficient sales representative, found fulfillment working remotely for an Israeli company. Her warmth endeared her to colleagues, and she reveled in meeting monthly targets. However, enticed by a promising opportunity with a local Palestinian company, she decided to embrace the prospect of contributing to her homeland.
On that fateful day, as Salma navigated the Gosh Atsion checkpoint between Bethlehem and Hebron, tragedy struck. Israeli soldiers, without warning, fired upon her, leading to her immediate arrest. The news reached her father, Ismael, who, unaware of the severity of her injuries, grappled with the shocking revelation.
Ismael, in anguish, shared the grim truth – Salma had been shot in the belly, the bullet piercing her backbone, rendering her paralyzed. Held in Shaary Tsedek hospital, she underwent a surgery stripping her of a kidney and enduring a 50% liver resection. The subsequent transfer to Al-Ramlah prison, known for housing critical medical cases, intensified the nightmare.
Incarcerated for a month, Salma faced a series of charges, including the absurd allegations of possessing a knife and attempting stabbing. Ismael, along with Salma’s mother and young daughter, was denied the basic right to visit or communicate with her during this harrowing period.
Sara, blissfully unaware of her mother’s plight, believed her to be in the hospital, grappling with an illness. Little did she know about the grim reality that had befallen her mother.
Salma’s time in prison was marked by indignity, a lack of privacy, and a struggle against her newfound disability. Her father, haunted by fear, spoke of the challenges his favorite daughter now faced – a life confined to a wheelchair, dependent on others for even the simplest daily tasks.
The Occupation Court’s relentless pursuit of charges only deepened the wounds, casting a shadow over Salma’s already fraught existence. The emotional turmoil inflicted upon her family, unable to provide comfort or support, added to the tragedy.
However, amidst the darkness emerged a glimmer of hope. The Prisoner Exchange Deal between Hamas and Israel, sealed on October 7th, 2023, brought a twist in Salma’s fate. Her name, a part of the negotiated exchange, led to her liberation on November 24th, 2023.
Salma’s release, while a moment of triumph, underscored the fragility of life in a conflict-ridden region. The tale of this Palestinian mother, her resilience, and the silent suffering of countless others echo the broader narrative of a people caught in the crossfire of geopolitical struggles.
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.
Trump and the E. Jean Carroll Case
Trump and the E. Jean Carroll Case
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #121 | By: Arvind Salem | February 01, 2024
Photo taken from: www.nbcnews.com
__________________________________
On January 26, 2024, a New York jury ruled that Trump was responsible for paying journalist Elizabeth Jean Carroll (usually referred to as E. Jean Carroll) $83.3 million in damages: a huge legal setback for Trump as he faces a total 91 state and federal charges.
This case is an extension of a previous case centered around allegations that in 1996 Trump raped her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in New York City. Trump entirely dismissed the accusations and attacked Carroll’s character, which she alleges caused her damages to her career and constituted defamation. The jury ruled that Trump didn’t rape Carroll, but he was liable for sexual assault and awarded her $5 million in compensatory damages and punitive damages for the defamation.
This new case centers around further comments Trump made post-presidency and continued damage that those comments have inflicted on E. Jean Carroll. Given that this is the second time this issue has been litigated, and Trump was found to be responsible, Trump was given much harsher punitive damages: out of the $83.3 million in total payment, $18.3 million was for compensatory damages, the largest part being $11 million for damages to her reputation, and $65 million in punitive damages, which she claimed she needed to stop Trump from continuing to defame her. Trump has already stated that he would appeal both decisions: meaning that Carroll will not see the nearly $90 million total for a long time, until all appeals are exhausted.
Policy Analysis:
This case was allowed to proceed despite the statute of limitations already expiring, due to a New York state law passed in 2022 called The Adult Survivors Act that gave all sexual abuse victims a year to file civil lawsuits, even if the statute of limitations had run out. Under this law, Carroll sued Trump. However, since this law only allows for civil suits, Carroll could only sue for the defamation a civil violation) and not the assault ( a criminal offense). Additionally, this case was previously blocked by the Trump justice department, with Bill Barr, the attorney general, arguing that Trump made his statements as part of his official capacity as president. In 2023, the Biden Justice Department lifted the restriction and allowed the case to move forward.
This trial took the verdict of the other trial as fact, so this case was predicated on the fact that Trump did assault Carroll, and the only question was the extent of the damages especially regarding Trump’s later statements. This trial also tested Trump’s courtroom presence, which will likely be important in his later, higher-stakes trials. In this regard, Trump did not make a good impression on the judge, by audibly commenting during Carroll’s testimony such that opposing counsel and the jury could hear, which resulted in him getting admonished. He also, in one last act of defiance, stormed out during closing arguments, leaving his lawyer alone to deliver the argument.
Engagement Resources:
- Joe Biden for President: Readers who have reservations about voting for Trump in 2024 because of this case should explore this website to see if Joe Biden is an alternative that they would support.
- DCCC: Readers who are inclined to support the Democratic party after hearing about this case may wish to explore this site to donate to Democratic Congressional Campaigns in 2024.
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.
Is Russia’s president Putin afraid of Alexei Navalny? (Part 2)
Is Russia’s president Putin afraid of Alexei Navalny? (Part 2)
Foreign Policy Brief #117 | By: Yelena Korshunov | January 31, 2024
Featured Photo taken from: www.ctvnews.ca
“I will give up neither my ideas nor my homeland.”
__________________________________
Alexei Navalny, a leading opponent to Russia’s president, wrote a post three years after his return to Russia from Germany, where he was treated after being supposedly poisoned by the Russian government. Navalny says that he is regularly asked why he returned to Russia. He writes that the other prisoners ask this question “simply and directly,” while the prison administration asks “carefully, with the recorders turned off.” The imprisoned politician notes that the majority of them “do not believe simple motives” and assume that he had “some kind of cunning plan in which the Kremlin towers are involved.”
In his post Alexei Navalny states that “it happens that now in Russia I have to pay by sitting in solitary confinement for my right to have and to not hide my convictions. And I certainly don’t like sitting. But I will give up neither my ideas nor my homeland. My beliefs are not exotic, or sectarian, or radical. On the contrary, everything I believe in is based on science and historical experience. People in power must change. The best way to elect power is fair and free elections. Everyone needs a fair trial. Corruption destroys the state. There should be no censorship. The future lies with these principles.”
On December 6, 2023, connection with the politician was lost. After 19 days, Alexei Navalny was found above the Arctic Circle in correctional colony # 3 “Polar Wolf” in the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Region. The lack of communication and any information about the prisoner at the transfer to another correctional facility is the norm for the Russian prison system. The destination during the transfer is kept secret not only from lawyers and relatives, but from the convicted person himself. A person might even learn about the situation of being sent to another colony just a couple of hours before departure.
For a prisoner it means a constant state of uncertainty and terrible transportation conditions. Prisoners, as a rule, are transported by rail in so-called “stolypin cars” [named after a 19th century Russia’s minister Stolypin in whose period these wagons were widely implemented]. This is a special carriage that accommodates up to 12 people in one ordinary compartment designed for 4 persons. These carriages have no windows, a prisoner can only go to the bathroom under escort, and hot meals are not provided during the entire time of transit.
The “Polar Wolf” colony where Russia’s president Vladimir Putin transferred his opponent has a very bad reputation. It always functioned as a colony for especially dangerous recidivists, but during Putin’s regime it became a placement for his political opponents and disgraced oligarchs such as Platon Lebedev, a business partner of Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s [Russian public and political figure, entrepreneur, publicist, and former oligarch, residing in Europe after his release from Russia’s prison]. This colony is known as one of the most northern, remote, and having harsh conditions.
Russia’s opposing mass media outlet Meduza (now located in Latvia) cites a lawyer who specializes in protecting the rights of convicts. “This is a disgusting colony,” he says. “The conditions for serving a sentence are very difficult, any requests from there are blocked, except, perhaps, for some medical necessities and financial assistance. Navalny will be able to keep in touch with the world only through lawyers.”
The colony is located in the tundra, in an arctic climate. “The conditions there are extremely difficult, since the special regime is actually legalized torture in and of itself,” the lawyer continues. “Last year the prosecutor of the Yamal-Nenets Autonomous Region identified violations at “Polar Wolf” in the field of labor protection, fire safety, and sanitary standards. That means that everything is so bad with the conditions in the colony that even the prosecutor’s office considered it necessary to intervene, although, as a rule, prosecutorial supervision over places of deprivation of liberty is of a very formal nature.”
This colony has always been famous for the fact that prisoners were sent there for “breaking”. Those who are sitting there today are mostly political prisoners, who “are ready to do anything for a pack of cigarettes, because of the difficulty to serve a sentence there,” – says a representative of a prisoners’ rights foundation Sitting Rus’ [Rus’ is an old name of Russia].
Maximum security colonies such as “Polar Wolf” house recidivists, serial killers, and those who have had their death sentence switched to life imprisonment. However, Russia’s current president stuffs them with his political opponents. To date, Alexei Navalny has been sentenced to 19 years in prison. Most likely, in this colony, he will be completely isolated from the outside world, forgoing any of his previous influence on Russian voters’ minds.
Engagement Resources:
- Associated Press about Alexei Navalny, https://apnews.com/hub/alexei-navalny
- Petition to free Alexei Navalny, https://www.amnesty.org/en/petition/russia-aleksei-navalny-putin-moscow/
- Information about Alexei Navalny and another petition to free the politician, https://free.navalny.com/
- Official website of Alexei Navalny (in Russian language), https://navalny.com/
Read the first part of the Alexei Navalny series here. 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.
Does Nikki Haley Have a Shot?
Does Nikki Haley Have a Shot?
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #120 | By: Arvind Salem | January 31, 2024
Photo taken from: www.19thnews.org
__________________________________
With Ron DeSantis dropping out right before the New Hampshire primary, it left the rest of the Republican primary as a two candidate race between Nikki Haley and Trump. Haley, not initially projected to be the last person standing against Trump, polling only 2% at the start of the race, has nevertheless weathered the withering of the field from a wide-eyed group of 13 presidential hopefuls to the battle-tested final two. Yet the one constant throughout this whole turbulent sage is that Donald Trump is still projected to win.
In the official primary election so far, there is only a sample size of two states: Iowa and New Hampshire. As the first states up, they have an outsized influence for the nominee: a good performance allowing them to gain momentum to bolster their candidacy, while a disappointing one can strike a death blow to a campaign.
Unfortunately for Haley she did not win either New Hampshire or Iowa, placing third in Iowa, after DeSantis and Trump, and second in New Hampshire. The winners of the New Hampshire Primary in the last four competitive election cycles have gone on to win the nomination and no Republican in the modern primary era has failed to win the nomination after winning both Iowa and New Hampshire. Trump beat Haley by 11 points in New Hampshire and 30 points in Iowa.
New Hampshire was expected to be closer as the voters there are typically more moderate, which is a key group that forms Haley’s appeal, yet she was unable to pull out the victory. Despite these setbacks, Haley has vowed to stay in the race, at least until her home state of South Carolina, where she was formerly governor.
Analysis:
The path to victory for Haley is hard to imagine, but examining her current strategy can still provide insight into potential flaws in Trump’s armor that the Democratic candidate, most likely Biden, can use against him. The longer Haley can draw out this fight, the more weaknesses she exposes to Trump, and takes away time that he could’ve used to focus on the general. However, if she loses in South Carolina, her path to victory would essentially be shut.
The reason it is so hard for Haley to win and beat Trump is that she, and every other Republican challenger to Trump, had to do two things: they needed to be different enough to merit running, yet similar enough to gain support in Republican strongholds, which is even more important in a primary of solely Republican voters. Challengers like Ramaswamy and DeSantis essentially marketed themselves as similar to Trump on policy, but were willing to go more extreme (Ramaswamy) or were more effective in accomplishing the agenda (DeSantis). However, Haley is presenting herself as an alternative to Trump not only in these terms, but also in terms of actual policy priorities.
These differences between Haley and Trump and their electoral implications are best manifested in foreign policy: Trump represents a new era of Republicans, disillusioned after conflicts in the Middle East, that advocates for more isolationism and less U.S. activity, which can be seen in his reluctance to give aid to Ukraine. However, Haley is more of a traditional conservative war hawk, who emphasizes the need for the United States to be strong on the global stage and promote U.S. leadership abroad. This philosophy is more typical of the conservatives of the past, but also what led the U.S. into largely unpopular wars in the Middle East, prompting the Republicans to turn away from that ideology.
This essentially shows Haley’s unique approach to answering the contradiction posed: her strategy seems to be representing a return to a pre-Trump Republican party and bet on the fact that there is a broad, deep-seeded desire in the Republican base to return to that era rather than continue on the path of Trumpism. This approach has also allowed her to bolster her conservative credentials amid doubts of her true commitment to the conservative cause: she can highlight her support of classical conservative policies as South Carolina’s Governor, like voter ID and pension reform, while painting Trump as the conservative neophyte who is departing from their core conservative principles. Despite this attempt voters still view her as a moderate, with her losing significantly to Trump among registered Republicans, but making some of that up with the moderate vote. Exemplifying this, an NBC News/Des Moines Register/Mediacom poll of Iowa just prior to the GOP caucuses reported that 43% of Haley’s supporters said they would vote for President Joe Biden over Trump this fall.
Haley is also moving to attack Trump in terms of his mental competency, framing him just like Republicans have attempted to frame Biden: a relic of a previous era who is unfit to be president in the current day. Haley has manifested this in policy by calling for a mental competency test for anyone who would be president over the age of 75, which includes Trump, and attempting to goad him into debating her, where she would presumably try to prove this point on the debate stage.
In practical terms, the Haley campaign has stated that they believe there is still a path to victory, since more states mirror New Hampshire’s ideology than Iowa’s, and the New Hampshire contest was significantly closer than the Iowa one, although Trump still won by double-digits. Yet, that theory will be put to the test in South Carolina: if she can’t win the state where she theoretically has the most name recognition and proven track record, it will not only be tough to win, but tough to even convince donors and the public that she has a viable shot. Trump has already secured key endorsements in South Carolina to combat Haley’s theoretical advantage: Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster, the state’s lieutenant governor, attorney general, treasurer and House speaker and statewide officials, along with U.S. Reps. Joe Wilson, William Timmons, Russell Fry and Senator Tim Scott.
Engagement Resources:
- Joe Biden for President: Those who are not convinced by either Haley or Trump should consider exploring this campaign.
- Nikki Haley for President: Those who are intrigued by Nikki Haley as a possible Trump alternative for conservatives should consider exploring this campaign.
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.
Carefree Use of Groundwater Is Making Us Thirsty
Carefree Use of Groundwater Is Making Us Thirsty
Environment Policy Brief #164 | By: Todd J. Broadman | January 30, 2024
Photo taken from: www.popularmechanics.com
__________________________________
Summary
There is a depletion of groundwater in the U.S. Much of the reason has to do with industrial scale agriculture used to grow crops that feed animals. A primary culprit is alfalfa. Alfalfa is a legume and is preferred by beef cattle producers because beef cattle raised on alfalfa hay get bigger faster, and dairy cows fed alfalfa produce more milk. Alfalfa contains more than 1,800 pounds of protein per acre on an annual basis and as a result is the top cash crop in many states. Farmers can’t get enough of this “high quality forage.” That high protein content requires copious amounts of water to grow; alfalfa ranks as one of the most water-intensive crops, requiring about 1,630,000 gallons of water per acre. On average, that’s equivalent to annual water use for 10 residential homes. Over 6 million acres of American farmland is dedicated to growing water-hungry alfalfa.
Furthermore, there is a direct line connection between alfalfa, dairy cows, and the American diet. In addition to demand for beef, increasingly, chicken is preferred – and the consumer demand for cheese has skyrocketed as well. Cheese consumption has nearly doubled over the last few decades, driven by the popularity of cheese covered pizza. In 2023, the average consumer tipped the scales, consuming over 100 pounds of chicken, a doubling in proportions, similar to the increase in cheese consumption. (The Eat-Lancet Commission recommends the optimal diet ought to be closer to one quarter of those amounts).
According to Brian Richter, president of Sustainable Waters, crops grown for cattle feed are the “greatest consumer of river water in the western United States.” One telling statistic is that 55 percent of water in the Colorado River Basin is used to grow feed crops including alfalfa, grass hay, and corn. Meanwhile, almost 80 percent of monitoring wells hit record lows in the past decade.
This is why in states like Nevada, alfalfa is the state’s top cash crop, while in Arkansas it is soybeans – to feed the billion or so chickens in that region of the country. As with alfalfa, the soy crop too, is largely dependent upon water from depleted aquifers. The amount of irrigated acreage dedicated to soybean production, mostly used for animals, has seen an 800 percent increase over the last 5 decades. And then there is the water required for corn, about half of which also goes toward animal feed, whose acreage has gone up 600 percent over the same period.
Arizona is typical of many western states in that there are no legal limits to use of groundwater, a finite resource. This availability of groundwater has led foreign investors (Saudi Arabia figures prominently in Arizona) to purchase land in unregulated states and grow crops like alfalfa in an otherwise arid desert – and then ship the crop home to feed cattle. For these reasons, in the absence of federal regulations on aquifer use, states are now creating rules where little or no regulation existed. There are more calls to decrease alfalfa production in western states that depend on the Colorado River. This is an uphill battle though, as is the case in traditional farming cultures, the value of freedom to: choose crops planted based on economics as well as respond to consumer demand.
Analysis
In the face of the looming water shortage, we have a western farming culture that focuses on the immediate short-term economics and freedom of choice for the American consumer. California farmer Ronnie Leimgruber reflects that culture when he states that “the reason I grow alfalfa is because it’s the most profitable crop that I can grow, because that’s what people want to buy.” Environmental concerns are not on his radar. “If they wanted to buy more lettuce or more onions or more tomatoes,” he poses, “I would grow up for them — if it was more profit. But currently, people like eating pizzas. They like eating beef. They like eating Happy Meals at McDonald’s. They like eating cheese quesadillas. And I produce the feedstock that feeds the cattle that makes all those products.”
The environmental reality though, is that each pound of cheese produced requires, on average, 10 pounds of milk. And the cows producing that milk need to eat high-protein foods that require vast quantities of water, like alfalfa.
Farmers grow alfalfa because it is very profitable – selling for a high of $320 per ton in 2022, up from $210 the year before, making it more lucrative than other large-scale crops like wheat. With sufficient water, alfalfa can be harvested up to 10 times a year. It provides nutritious and healthy feed for cattle and dairy cows, which means there’s significant demand for it both in the United States and overseas in regions such as the Middle East and Asia.
Fortunately, there are those, like Brian E. Olmstead, who serves on Idaho’s Water Resource Board and issues a cautionary message: “Everybody thought, this was such a huge resource, we can’t ever deplete it.” Major global dairy food producers like Glanbia of Ireland, Lactalis of France and Agropur of Canada all operate large processing plants in western states. Glanbia alone has four plants in Idaho, which use 4.3 billion pounds of milk a year. They are aware of the significant toll their production exacts on water resources. Exports of alfalfa and other hay types also play a significant role in water usage; almost 20% of alfalfa was exported in 2021, and most of that to China. They are paying top dollar to U.S. producers to support their growing domestic dairy industry.
Speaking out on behalf of our aquifers are people like Gerald McKenna, on the board of the Desert Water Agency in Palm Springs, California. He states bluntly that, “We can do one simple thing and our water supply crisis will be over. We can stop growing alfalfa.” His declaration is sensible, “It seems to me to be just crazy to be growing that water-thirsty product in one of the driest places in the country. And yet that’s what we do.” Like McKenna, Aaron Smith, an agricultural economist at UC-Davis, also speaks for the environment over industry pressures: “From a pure resources perspective, it’s inefficient to grow plants, then feed those to animals and have animals use that energy and then we eat that energy. It would be more efficient to directly eat plants but the problem is, they don’t taste as good.”
When it comes to groundwater depletion, short-term economics and corporate profits are ushered along without much caution or environmental guardrails. In that respect, U.S. aquifers are viewed much like carbon reserves – there for the taking. The hard tradeoffs and sacrifices are right around the corner. That’s when corporate profits dry up along with flow of water.
Engagement Resources:
- https://foodprint.org is dedicated to research and education on food production practices. Their aim is to pull back the curtain on the impacts of industrial food production practices.
- https://grist.org is dedicated to telling stories of climate solutions and a just future. Their goal is to use the power of storytelling to illuminate the way toward a better world.
- https://www.alfalfa.org is an umbrella organization of state and regional alfalfa seed and alfalfa hay associations, genetic suppliers, seed marketers, and allied industry members dedicated to promoting the interests of the nation’s alfalfa.
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. Your support matters – we depend on readers like you to aide in protecting fearless independent journalism!
Journalism Rights Should Matter Like Other Human Rights
Journalism Rights Should Matter Like Other Human Rights
Social Justice Policy Brief #154 | By: Diing Magot | January 30, 2024
Featured Photo taken from: www.cl.usembassy.gov
__________________________________
The author is a new U.S. RESIST NEWS Reporter who comes from South Sudan (South Sudanese) , has spent time covering stories in South Sudan and Kenya, and now resides in the US. This Brief in part is a reflection of her time spent in covering news in all 3 countries.
Summary
Journalism is currently under threat, in today’s world people are still confused about the role of a journalist in a democratic society. Professional journalists at present face threats while doing their job of uncovering the truth. Access to information is a challenge and journalists continuously work in an environment that can lead to being harassed threatened, jailed or even killed. According to a report by the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), last year more than 300 journalists around the world have been imprisoned because of their work.
CPJ also reports that in 66 cases, those held have not yet been told of the charges they are facing. They often face gratuitously cruel conditions, due process is frequently subverted as authorities prolong pre-charge and pre-trial detention of journalists, and journalists’ lawyers themselves face retaliation around the world.
Analysis
A journalist is someone whose career includes research that leads to investigating, searching for contacts, interviewing sources and producing all the facts, and then reporting it as news through a medium such as newspapers, magazines, radio, television and the internet.
In Kenya, Article 33 protects and entrenches the Freedom of Expression in all its manifestations, including the freedom to seek, receive or impart information or ideas, including artistic creativity, academic and scientific research, but with limited exceptions to propaganda for war, incitement to violence; hate speech or advocacy of hatred.
When I was growing up, I always wanted to be a part of the change in society. I started my journalism career as a print news intern at Kenya News Agency in Nairobi, Kenya. Working in the media is interesting because you get to work with experienced journalists, writers, and editors.
I also interned at Royal Media Services , Citizen Television. This organization was a bigger media house. It had a television station, digital media and a radio station that has local dialects from Kenya. When I was an intern at Citizen TV , I was star struck when I met the news anchors that were on television. I loved working in the media it made me learn something new every day about people. As a journalist you need to have tough skin when you are in the media otherwise you will not survive. Everyone is very ruthless and wants to be on top. When you write a lot of negative news such as rape, murder, lynching, corruption, protests, it can make you lose trust in people.
But when you see your byline it is very satisfying to see your story published. When I was in South Sudan the media field was different. Article 24 of the Interim Constitution of South Sudan 2011 talks of freedom of expression but with a limit. I was a member of a journalists group there, and we were usually amongst the first people to know when a story broke. However, sometimes the editor needed to decide whether the story was newsworthy before it was published. If the story incited violence or hate speech, or had the possibility of bringing defamation charges, it was killed.
You are always learning something new because everybody has a different life experience and stories. You will do a lot of research to have an idea of what you are about to write. If you are the editor, you are the agenda setter , you get to decide which stories will make the headlines and get people talking. As a journalist, you will network with many people especially during press briefings. You meet journalists from other organizations and when you write someone’s story you are always making new connections.
In America, I have noticed journalism is different, very fast, and there are many organizations that sell news. It is more commercial and each state has their own news so it is easy to not know what is going on in other states if I do not follow up on the re-cap of nationwide news. The news is technologically advanced and AI is being introduced to news. There sometimes is a mistrust in news when it comes to disinformation especially now that elections are coming up.
Engagement Resources
- National Press Club – There are many organizations that has supported me as a journalist support journalists such as the National Press Club, which is the meeting place in Washington DC for newsmakers and journalists. It serves its members through professional development activities that strengthens their skills.
- Committee to Protect Journalists – The Committee to Protect Journalists is an independent, nonprofit organization that promotes press freedom worldwide. The defend the right of journalists to report the news safely and without fear of reprisal and provides financial and psychological support as well.
- IJNET – International journalists network delivers the latest on global media innovation, news apps and tools, training opportunities and expert advice for professional and emerging journalists worldwide.
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.
A Closer Look at US Global Leadership: Navigating the Complex Dynamics of Ukraine, Gaza, and Taiwan
A Closer Look at US Global Leadership: Navigating the Complex Dynamics of Ukraine, Gaza, and Taiwan
Foreign Policy Brief #116 | By: Inijah Quadri | January 29, 2024
Featured Photo taken from: www.theguardian.com
__________________________________
In an era of evolving geopolitical landscapes, the United States faces the challenge of exerting effective global leadership amidst complex international conflicts and tensions. Three prominent areas of concern include the situations in Ukraine, Gaza, and Taiwan. Each region presents unique challenges that test U.S. foreign policy principles, strategic interests, and its commitment to global stability. These situations require nuanced approaches, balancing the pursuit of peace, respect for national sovereignty, and the need to uphold international law.
Analysis
a. Ukraine: The U.S.’s support for Ukraine in its conflict with Russia demonstrates a strong commitment to European security and the principles of national sovereignty. This involvement, marked by substantial military aid to Ukraine and sanctions against Russia, not only underscores the long-term impact of U.S. foreign policy on European stability but also influences Russia’s international stance. While this support is a significant factor in the ongoing conflict, it also brings into question the extent and implications of U.S. involvement, especially in terms of potential escalation and destabilization within the broader European region. Such a scenario could lead to shifts in military and economic alliances across Europe.
Nevertheless, the current approach aligns with the success seen in historical contexts, such as U.S. support in the Balkans during the 1990s, which helped to stabilize the region post-conflict. However, in this instance, the US was instrumental in helping to broker a peace deal. Continuing with existing support, the U.S. should likewise bolster diplomatic efforts through platforms like the United Nations, NATO, and possibly BRICS, to seek a peaceful resolution, mirroring successful diplomatic engagements like the Dayton Agreement.
It is worth noting that the U.S.’s stance on Ukraine is deeply intertwined with its domestic politics. Notably, the MAGA Republicans have shown reluctance to support further funding for Ukraine, tying their approval to demands for stricter immigration policies. This standoff reflects a broader political divide within the U.S., where foreign policy objectives are increasingly used as leverage in domestic policy negotiations. Such internal conflicts not only complicate the U.S.’s commitment to Ukraine but also send mixed signals to international allies and adversaries alike.
b. Gaza: The Gaza Strip’s situation, exacerbated by the Israel-Palestine conflict, presents a different challenge. In the context of Israel and Gaza, President Biden faces pressure from progressive Democrats urging a more balanced approach towards the Israel-Palestine conflict. This faction advocates for greater support of Palestinian rights, posing a challenge to the traditional U.S. foreign policy that heavily favors Israel. While the situation in Gaza is particularly dire, with frequent humanitarian crises, the U.S. has historically been a staunch ally of Israel. Yet it faces calls to address the humanitarian needs in Gaza and promote a just solution to the conflict.
To avoid being labeled as two-faced, this necessitates a careful balance of U.S. foreign policy. Biden’s navigation of these internal pressures is also delicate, as he must balance progressive demands with the potential backlash from a significant domestic Jewish constituency, which traditionally influences U.S. policy in the region.
Here, the U.S. has the opportunity to play a constructive role by increasing humanitarian aid and facilitating dialogue. Learning from the success of the Oslo Accords in the 1990s, in which the U.S. played a pivotal role in mediating, similar diplomatic efforts could be employed to rejuvenate peace talks. The U.S. can leverage its influence to support UN resolutions that focus on alleviating the crisis and promoting a two-state solution.
c. Taiwan: Taiwan’s situation involves the U.S.’s strategic interests in the Asia-Pacific region, particularly the island’s role as a major chip manufacturer. This economic interdependence complicates the U.S.’s role in the region. While supporting Taiwan’s defense capabilities is crucial for maintaining regional stability and securing U.S. economic interests, any significant shift in policy could have domestic economic repercussions. Additionally, the U.S. must consider the broader impact on its relationship with China, a key player in global economics and politics.
The U.S. follows a policy of strategic ambiguity towards Taiwan, supporting its defense capabilities while not formally recognizing it as an independent state. This stance aims to deter Chinese aggression without provoking a direct conflict. The potential risks of the U.S.’s strategic ambiguity towards Taiwan include misinterpretation by China, possibly leading to miscalculations or unintended escalations. In the current global political climate, this approach risks alienating regional players who seek clear commitments. Thus, while maintaining a balance, the U.S. must be cautious to ensure its policy does not inadvertently escalate tensions or create strategic vulnerabilities.
The U.S. policy of strategic ambiguity, while supporting Taiwan’s self-defense capabilities, is a measured approach to maintaining regional stability. This stance is reminiscent of the U.S.’s Cold War policies, which effectively deterred conflicts through strategic ambiguity. Enhancing diplomatic efforts to reduce cross-strait tensions and encouraging China’s peaceful rise are vital. The U.S. can advocate for Taiwan’s participation in international organizations, drawing on the successful precedent of U.S. support for China’s WTO entry, which facilitated more engagement in global affairs.
The U.S. approach in these regions reflects a balancing act between moral imperatives, strategic interests, and international norms. The effectiveness of U.S. policies in these complex scenarios is a subject of ongoing debate, highlighting the challenges of contemporary global leadership. In each scenario, however, it remains imperative that the U.S. navigate its web of internal pressures and interests while striving to maintain its global leadership role and adhere to its foreign policy principles.
Engagement Resources
- Council on Foreign Relations (https://www.cfr.org/): Provides in-depth analysis of global issues, including U.S. foreign policy towards Ukraine, Gaza, and Taiwan.
- United States Institute of Peace (https://www.usip.org/): Offers resources on conflict resolution and peacebuilding, relevant to the situations in Ukraine and Gaza.
- Brookings Institution (https://www.brookings.edu/): Conducts research on U.S. policy in the Asia-Pacific, with a focus on Taiwan and China-U.S. relations.
- Amnesty International (https://www.amnesty.org/): Provides reports on human rights issues in conflict zones like Gaza.
- RAND Corporation (https://www.rand.org/): Offers analysis and research on defense and security, relevant to U.S. policy in Ukraine and Taiwan.
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.
Who Will Mitt Romney’s Successor Be?
Who Will Mitt Romney’s Successor Be?
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #119 | By: Courtney Denning | January 29, 2024
Photo taken from: www.motherjones.com
__________________________________
Senator Mitt Romney (R-UT) is stepping down from his position in Congress, leaving a Utah Senate seat open in the 2024 election. Romney gained his seat in 2018 after his two bids for the presidency in 2008 and 2012, with him winning the nomination in 2012 but losing to Barack Obama. Prior to this, he served as the governor of Massachusetts from 2003 to 2007.
In recent years, Romney has garnered attention for his criticisms of former president Donald Trump. He has frequently expressed his fears for the future of the Republican Party if it continues in the way he believes Trump is leading it.
The race for his former Senate seat exemplifies this growing divide in the GOP. Since Utah is an overwhelmingly conservative state, the winner of this seat will likely be decided in the Republican primaries on June 25, 2024. Although most are confident that a Republican will win the seat, there are stark differences in the ideologies of the candidates running for this Republican nomination. The winner of this race will signal whether the traditional “Romney Conservatism” or the emerging “Trump Republicanism” will dominate the state’s politics.
Analysis:
Here are profiles of the leading candidates to replace Romney:
Curtis has been serving in Congress as a Representative of Utah’s 3rd district since 2017. An early survey taken even before he announced he was running for the spot placed Curtis as the front-runner for the election. Unlike other prominent Utah politicians, Curtis has not endorsed Donald Trump, but has promised to vote for him if he is chosen as the presidential nominee.
Brent Orrin Hatch is running for the same seat that his father, Orrin Hatch, held for 42 years. Hatch has been running his own law private practice for the past 30 years, and he focuses his campaign on fiscal responsibility and decreasing the budget deficit. He has officially endorsed Donald Trump for president.
Utah’s current Speaker of the House, Brad Wilson, is stepping down to run for the Senate as a self-proclaimed “conservative fighter” and Trump supporter.
Staggs, the soon-to-be former Mayor of Riverton, UT, has also thrown his hat into the ring. In his campaign video announcing his candidacy, Staggs has endorsed Trump and set himself apart from Romney, saying that he’s “not a career politician or a Massachusetts millionaire.” Staggs is running in opposition to Romney’s legacy, criticizing his voting record and positioning himself as an uncompromising conservative.
Phippen, a former staff member for Utah Sen. Mike Lee, also represents a stronger conservative push for the Senate seat. She refers to herself as “not a politician” and publicly aligns with Trump. She is anti-federal spending, pro-life, pro-border wall, and staunchly conservative.
Randall’s campaign centers strong families and “Utah values” with an emphasis on Christian virtues. His run is set apart by a frugal budget. Randall said that he wants to model his political career after that of current Senator Mike Lee, a strong supporter of Trump.
Democrat Archie Williams III and Robert Newcomb of the Independent American Party are also running for Utah’s Senate Seat.
Most candidates running for this Senate position have been outspoken supporters of Donald Trump, marking a potential shift from the legacy left by Romney. The one candidate that could be expected to follow more closely in Romney’s ideological footsteps is Rep. John Curtis, who has not yet officially endorsed Trump.
Engagement Resources:
- Here is a complete list of everyone who has submitted an FEC Statement of Candidacy for this race, plus more information on their campaigns: https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Utah,_2024
- This is the official website regarding the Utah 2024 elections: https://vote.utah.gov/current-election-information/
- A study of Utah Public Opinion from last year shows that Utah Republicans are likely looking for a candidate that stands in opposition to Romney, due to his high unfavorability: https://www.noblepredictiveinsights.com/post/state-of-2024-utah-senate-race
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.
