JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
TikTok and Its Effects on Young People
Brief #106 – Technology Policy Brief
by : Steve Piazza
With an unwieldy number of users, TikTok already faces an uphill battle employing a security system that works effectively to protect its users. But with all the protections in place, workarounds still exist and savvy youngsters know how to exploit the loopholes.
Why Former President Trump’s Presidential Immunity Arguments Should Be Rejected
Brief #217 – Civil Rights Policy Brief
by Rodney A. Maggay
Presidential immunity in the United States is a legal doctrine that provides a defense for former and current presidents from certain legal claims. While the doctrine is not mentioned in the text of the U.S. Constitution or any federal statute, it has been recognized by United States Supreme Court case law, although in a rather incomplete fashion.
Abortion Restrictions Continue as Women Stockpile Medication
Policy Brief #169 – Health and Gender
by Geoffrey Small
With recent state developments in restricting access to abortion procedures, women across the U.S. are feeling the impact of their waning reproductive rights by taking precautions that were unimaginable in the Roe v. Wade era.
Fadi’s Story: The Challenges to Palestinian Identity
Brief #113 – Foreign Policy Brief
by : Aziza Taslaq
Fadi’s story sheds light on the resilience and determination of Palestinians facing identity challenges and calls for global recognition of their rights and a just resolution to the ongoing conflicts in the region.
Is Russia’s President Putin Afraid of Alexei Navalny?
Brief #112 – Foreign Policy Brief
by : Yelena Korshunov
Alexei Navalny is one of the leaders of the Russian opposition and a leading opponent of Russia’s president Vladimir Putin. Navalny gained initial fame for his investigations into corruption in Russia.
Reinventing Policing: The Road to Police Reform in the United States
Brief #153 – Social Justice Policy Brief
by Inijah Quadri
In the United States, the urgent need for police reform has been brought into sharp focus following high-profile incidents involving police use of force. The tragic deaths of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and countless others at the hands of law enforcement have sparked nationwide protests and a deep reevaluation of policing practices.
AI and the Dumbing Down of Education
Brief #88 – Education Policy Brief
by Rudolph Lurz
In many ways, 2023 was the year of AI. ChatGPT is ubiquitous in boardrooms and classrooms alike. Its usage is prevalent across grade levels and industries. In short, AI bots can provide full essays for students… The technology is progressing faster than school districts’ capacity to keep up with it.
Updates on the Israel-Hamas War
Brief #111 – Foreign Policy Brief
by : Abran C
Updates on the Israel-Hamas War, including the current situation in Gaza, a genocide case against Israel filed by South Africa, a Hamas leader killed in Beirut, attacks on ships in the Red Sea by Yemen, and more.
The Week That Was: Global News in Review
Brief #110 – Foreign Policy Brief
by : Abran C
A powerful earthquake hit Japan on New Year’s Day, Somalia has promised to defend its territory by “any legal means,” Argentina formally announced last week that it would not accept the invitation to join the BRICS bloc of developing economies, and more covered in this week’s review.
In The Shadow of the Israel-Hamas Conflict: One Palestinian Perspective
In The Shadow of the Israel-Hamas Conflict: One Palestinian Perspective
Foreign Policy Brief #97 | By: Aziza Taslaq | November 6, 2023
Photo taken from: bnn.network
__________________________________
The Israel-Hamas conflict, a decades-long struggle, has had a profound impact on the lives of ordinary Palestinian citizens. In this interview, we dig deeper into the experiences and perspectives of Sara, a young woman from the West Bank with roots in the city of Nablus, Palestine. One thing I should mention is that Sara does not support Hamas, but she does not condemn it either; she believes in the right to resist. Her story reflects the complex emotions and challenges many Palestinians face in the region.
daily life has been fundamentally shaped by the Israel-Hamas Sara’s conflict. She has been affected psychologically and physically. Since the conflict began, Sara has started to suffer from insomnia due to the images and videos she watches on social media platforms. She has also suffered from eye pain and hand joint stiffness because of her lack of sleep and overuse of her phone during this challenging time.
Every night, Israeli soldiers enter the city she lives in, Nablus, and she can hear gunfire. The West Bank is now riddled with checkpoints, and cities are commonly locked down. The presence of settlers adds a layer of threats, making ordinary life a constant struggle. Living in a state of insecurity is emotionally draining, taking a toll on Sara’s mental well-being.
Tragedy has struck Sara’s life as well. She recently lost a schoolmate to ongoing violence. Her friends in Gaza, too, bear the scars of the conflict. One friend was shot in the hand and had to treat his wounds independently due to limited access to medical facilities. Another friend, Anas, who now resides in Turkey, has suffered the profound loss of seven family members, including his brother, three nephews, an uncle, and two cousins.
Sara’s perspective on how the conflict should end reflects a deep longing for justice and peace. In her view, the resolution lies in Israelis leaving Palestinian territories. She makes a crucial distinction between peaceful Jews and those she holds responsible for the crimes committed. Sara does not endorse the two-state solution, asserting that the land belongs to Palestinians who were forcibly displaced. She envisions an independent Palestinian state coexisting with peaceful Jewish individuals who share the history of the land.
Sara seeks a just outcome that includes an end to the Gaza blockade. Her dream is of a Palestinian state free from Israeli presence while welcoming peaceful Jews who have been a part of historic Palestine. She advocates for the rights of Palestinians who were displaced from their homes, lands, and possessions.
Sara, like many Palestinians, believes that governance in Gaza should be transparent, accountable, and responsive to the needs of its citizens. She aspires to see democratic elections and a government that prioritizes the well-being and aspirations of the people. Despite the current control of Gaza by Hamas, she holds hope for a government that serves the interests of its people.
The Israel-Hamas conflict has cast a long shadow over the lives of ordinary Palestinian citizens, with Sara’s story offering a poignant illustration of their experiences, opinions, and dreams for a brighter future. It is still a difficult path to achieve permanent peace, which has been severely torn and complicated by the conflict. Sara, like many others, is desperate for the right solution that can bring about peace and prosperity to all those affected by the conflict.
CRISPR Gene Editing: Medical Breakthrough or Ethical Minefield?
CRISPR Gene Editing: Medical Breakthrough or Ethical Minefield?
Health and Gender Policy Brief #167 | By: Inijah Quadri | November 1, 2023
Photo taken from: discovermagazine.com
__________________________________
Policy Summary:
CRISPR (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats) gene editing, with its revolutionary implications in genetic engineering, stands at the intersection of medical innovation and profound ethical dilemmas. While it offers avenues for advanced therapies in medicine and sustainable practices in agriculture, it simultaneously throws us into an ethical labyrinth. The promises of CRISPR are undoubtedly enticing, but the underlying concerns regarding its long-term implications, especially when it comes to tampering with the very fabric of life, are undeniable.
How CRISPR Works:
CRISPR basically operates as a type of genetic ‘scissors’. It allows scientists to target specific strands of DNA within the nucleus of a cell and make precise changes, either by deleting or replacing specific genes. This mechanism is derived from a naturally occurring defense mechanism in bacteria, which they use to fend off viral attacks. By programming the Cas9 protein to target a specific location in the DNA, researchers can achieve an unparalleled level of precision in gene editing.
Policy Analysis:
The ethical landscape of gene editing, particularly in humans, is multifaceted and contentious. A central debate emerges: does our capacity to make these alterations imply a moral or ethical endorsement to proceed? This was brought to stark attention in 2018 with a Chinese scientist’s announcement of creating the first CRISPR-edited babies, engineered to be resistant to HIV. The aspiration to eradicate a debilitating disease is undoubtedly noble, but the action was met with global scientific denouncement due to the profound ethical implications and the unknown long-term consequences for both the edited children and their progeny.
A further area of contention lies in the potential for “designer babies,” wherein genetic selection could allow parents to pre-determine their child’s attributes, ranging from physical appearance to cognitive abilities. This sparks worries about perpetuating social inequalities, where genetic enhancements become a luxury only the affluent can afford. Furthermore, the philosophical debate arises over the morality of humans determining and potentially commodifying life’s very essence.
In the agricultural realm, CRISPR’s applications are no less controversial. On one hand, the technology holds the promise of producing crops resistant to pests, potentially decreasing our reliance on harmful pesticides. On the other hand, such genetic alterations could have unforeseen repercussions on the environment. A modification in one species might trigger unforeseen consequences throughout the broader ecosystem, potentially endangering biodiversity.
Beyond the contentious spheres, CRISPR technology has facilitated groundbreaking medical and scientific advancements. A significant example of its contribution is in the rapid development of the COVID-19 vaccine. By understanding and manipulating genetic information, scientists could expedite vaccine research, leading to timely solutions in combating the pandemic. Additionally, CRISPR holds potential in treating a range of genetic disorders, offering hope to many patients with conditions that were previously deemed untreatable. Such successes underscore the importance of continued exploration and responsible application of this powerful tool.
Overall, to navigate the complexities of CRISPR ethically, a dynamic and robust regulatory framework is imperative, one that can evolve with the swift pace of scientific discoveries. A collaborative approach is paramount, involving scientists, policymakers, ethicists, and society at large to engage in a constructive discourse. While frameworks like the U.S. National Institutes of Health’s research and guidelines offer some direction, there’s a clear and urgent need for more exhaustive global policies.
So far, the call in 2019 for a global moratorium on editing the human germline, which entails genetic changes that can be passed on to future generations, epitomizes this spirit of international collaboration. Such endeavors ensure that the myriad decisions surrounding CRISPR are not made in isolation but reflect a collective global commitment to ethical progress. And, while progress may be gradual, it is essential that important stakeholders firmly establish personal ethical boundaries to safeguard the future of both humanity and the natural world.
Engagement Resources:
- Innovative Genomics Institute (https://www.innovativegenomics.org/): A leading research entity dedicated to advancing genome editing technologies and addressing their ethical, legal, and societal implications.
- The Broad Institute (https://www.broadinstitute.org/): A leader in CRISPR research, providing extensive resources on the science, ethics, and policy implications of gene editing.
- The Hastings Center (https://www.thehastingscenter.org/): An independent research institute addressing the societal impact of advances in medicine and biology, including gene editing.
- The Center for Genetics and Society (https://www.geneticsandsociety.org/): A nonprofit organization advocating for responsible uses and effective societal governance of human genetic and reproductive technologies.
- The National Human Genome Research Institute (https://www.genome.gov/): Offers resources on the human genome, genetic diseases, and the ethical, legal, and social implications of genetic research.
Biden’s New Office of Gun Violence Prevention is More Necessary than Ever
Biden’s New Office of Gun Violence Prevention is More Necessary than Ever
Social Justice Policy Brief #151 | By: Arvind Salem | November 6, 2023
Photo taken from: apnews.com
__________________________________
Policy Summary:
On September 21, 2023, President Biden announced the creation of the Office of Gun Violence Prevention to be led by Vice President Harris, who has already amassed a lengthy record in combating gun violence during her tenure as the Attorney General of California, along with gun violence prevention experts Stefanie Feldman, Greg Jackson, and Rob Wilcox.
The purpose of the new office is to act as an enforcement mechanism for prior gun safety legislation: most prominently The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act enacted in 2022. This was the first major federal gun safety bill in nearly 30 years, which closed major loopholes and strengthened gun violence prevention policies, and perhaps most importantly expanded access to mental health services to address the root causes of gun violence.
The Office of Gun Violence Prevention represents a key legislative triumph for gun violence activists and young voters as a whole. The bill was introduced by Congressman Maxwell Alejandro Frost (FL-10), who is the only member of GenZ in Congress and was the former organizing director for March for our Lives, an organization founded by survivors of the Parkland School shooting to advocate for gun violence prevention legislation, along with Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) and numerous other gun violence prevention organizations.
Policy Analysis:
Politically, this is clearly an effort from President Biden to reach young voters. Stronger gun violence prevention legislation is a key priority for young voters and Biden made the issue a key cornerstone of his 2020 presidential campaign. A poll conducted by Harvard University’s Institute of Politics found that 64 percent of 18-to 29-year-olds believe that gun control laws in the United States should be more strict. In the leadup to the 2024 election, this is a surefire way to energize young voters, and also allows Biden to run on the fact that he made some progress on an issue that has been notoriously overlooked in terms of enacting important legislative changes and substantially strengthening enforcement of existing policies.
Beyond the cynical view that this is purely a political ploy, gun violence is a major issue in American life, and the younger voting demographic’s response to this issue is partially due to the devastating effects it’s had on their lives. Firearms are the number one killer of children in the United States. At the time of the announcement, over 1,000 children between the ages of 12-17 died from guns.
However, the rising prevalence of mass shootings has made gun violence an issue that can no longer be confined to any one age group. After the latest mass shooting in Maine that killed 18 people and wounded 13 others, it is becoming clear that gun violence prevention needs to become a national priority. This isn’t an isolated incident: there have been nearly 2 mass shootings per day in 2023. This new office is at the very least a governmental acknowledgement of the problem and a commitment to exploring for solutions to a problem that 60% of Americans believe is a very big problem in the United States today.
Engagement Resources:
- March for Our Lives – March for Our Lives is an advocacy organization founded by survivors of the Parkland school shooting that aims to develop and advocate for gun violence prevention policies.
- Everytown for Gun Safety – Everytown for Gun Safety is a non profit organization that seeks to educate people about the effects of gun violence and advocate for responsible gun safety legislation. They have nearly 10,000 members across all walks of life.
- Brady – Brady is an organization named after the bipartisan Brady gun law enacted in 1993 and works to further the spirit of that law currently by educating the public, advocating for legislation, and contributing to pro-bono legal services to challenge gun lobbies in court.
Democrats Should’ve Saved Kevin McCarthy
Democrats Should’ve Saved Kevin McCarthy
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #104 | By: Arvind Salem | November 1, 2023
Photo taken from: axios.com
__________________________________
Policy Summary:
On October 25,2023, Representative Mike Johnson won the floor vote to become the new Speaker of the House, leaving the House without a speaker for 22 days. This saga, kicked off after the ousting of former speaker McCarthy, was emblematic of the battle between the far-right and moderate wings of the Republican party.
The effort to oust McCarthy, spearheaded by Representative Matt Gaetz, was initiated after he compromised with Democrats to pass two compromise bills to raise the debt ceiling and avert a government shutdown. The compromises were broadly acceptable to both sides, however due to the Republican’s narrow majority in the House it only took 8 dissatisfied members to oust McCarthy, as Democrats stood idly by. Throughout his tenure, McCarthy has made many moves to placate the right wing of the party (including his decision to open an impeachment inquiry into Biden with scant evidence). As a result, McCarthy was ultimately too far left for the extremist members of his caucus, but too far right for Democrats to want to save. Shortly after, McCarthy declared he would not run to regain his Speakership.
Republicans tried to rally behind Steve Scalise (the House Majority Leader). When it became clear Scalise didn’t have enough votes, they nominated Jim Jordan( Chair of the House Judiciary Committee), who went through three agonizing votes before the Republicans voted to withdraw him. Shortly after, they nominated Doug Emmer, whose candidacy was doomed nearly immediately after he faced resistance from the right flank and was rebuked by former President Donald Trump. After three failed attempts, and multiple rounds of infighting during both the nomination and voting processes, the Republicans finally settled on Mike Johnson (R-LA.), who is emblematic of the far right shift of the Republican party.
Policy Analysis:
Unfortunately, the speakership is now in the hands of a “extreme right-wing ideologue” (according to Hakeem Jeffries). Johnson’s track record has been extensively publicized: his staunchly anti-LGBTQ beliefs and track record (even attempting to introduce a federal version of the “Don’t Say Gay Bill”), peddling 2020 elections conspiracies and his belief that Trump actually won it Johnson believes in radically cutting down social services, including essentially ending Social Security and Medicare.
However, the bigger problem is that this could’ve been avoided if Democrats had simply allowed Kevin McCarthy to remain speaker. Yes, McCarthy wasn’t perfect, but he was still willing to compromise and make some deals with Democrats when the country was at stake. Of course, the political calculations involved in this are exceedingly simple: let the Republicans throw themselves in disarray and watch them burn. With 2024 on the horizon that may be the best electoral strategy for Democrats to flip the House during the election, and possibly ride the wave in other races. Even that calculation is extremely narrow. Democrats could’ve allowed Republicans to devolve into chaos, but still save them in the end, allowing them to capitalize on the Republicans’ dysfunction, but still boast that they saved them in the end, appealing to moderate voters who are likely to decide major elections.
The best thing for the country undoubtably would’ve been to save McCarthy. The pressure from the far right made it clear that they were holding the Republicans hostage and were not going to settle for anything more moderate than McCarthy, making it a certainty that the new Speaker was going to be even worse than McCarthy was. The best solution would’ve been to settle for the lesser of the two evils and throw McCarthy a lifeline. Now, after both sides playing politics (albeit one for more admirable aims than the other), the country is left with a Speaker more extreme than before, which threatens to worsen polarization and gridlock when both are already at all time highs. This moment could’ve been used to heal the country, with one side extending an olive branch to the other, but instead we’ve become even more fractured with no solution on the horizon.
Engagement Resources:
- Brennan Center – The Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School is an organization that promotes reforms to American democracy and argues against many practices today such as gerrymandering and mass incarceration. Readers who are concerned about the health of democracy in light of this new Speaker may wish to support the Brennan Center and help it advance its proposed reforms to fix the political process.
- ActBlue – ActBlue allows people to donate to a host of Democratic organizations, candidates, and causes. Readers who are concerned about Republicans in power may wish to donate to some of these organizations.
- The Bridge Alliance – The Bridge Alliance is a collective working to act against political polarization. Those worried about polarization in light of these events may wish to contribute to this organization.
The Oil from Fracking Flows Freely in a Fractured Society
The Oil from Fracking Flows Freely in a Fractured Society
Environmental Policy Brief #162 | By: Todd J. Broadman | October 31, 2023
Photo taken from: nypost.com
__________________________________
Policy Summary:
The U.S. policy of energy independence is no more apparent than in the oil and gas fracking industry. This need for carbon energy has led to thousands of new oil leases and the increased oil extraction has moved the U.S. ahead of Saudi Arabia as the globe’s biggest oil producer. The related policies and resulting drilling activity has come at a cost. Fracking technology now allows operators to drill vertically, and then horizontally for thousands of feet. To do that requires mammoth quantities of water: as much as 40 million gallons per gas well. Water in deep aquifers that, once extracted, will not be replenished for generations. In addition, the resulting wastewater from this process contains arsenic, salts, radium, and other toxic chemicals. Alarming levels of methane are released as well. At large scale, these projects are termed “monster fracks.” Approximately 80 percent of current U.S. natural gas production and 65 percent of crude oil now comes from fracked wells; more than 17.6 million Americans reside within a mile of a fracked oil or gas well.
In states like Texas where 40 percent of fracked wells are located, frackers require no permits to drill their own groundwater wells, much less compliance regulations that require reporting. Ironically, there are water restrictions in place for residential users throughout drought-stricken communities in Texas while vast unregulated quantities of water are extracted for fracked wells. The oil and gas lobbies have effectively paralyzed Congress from holding the industry accountable for its environmental damage.
Federal policies have given states like Texas, Colorado, and Pennsylvania a green light to keep drilling. The Biden administration has actually approved more drilling permits, over 6,500 of them, than the Trump administration. These, along with other existing leases represent close to 24 million acres of public land. Although the Interior Department has made modest reforms regarding lease rules, there is no overarching policy to curtail or otherwise end fracking. If the U.S. actually applied United Nations recommendations to address climate change, all oil and gas extraction would end by 2031. A full quarter of U.S. greenhouse gases are attributed to fossil fuel extraction. The U.S. along with other OECD countries are, for the most part, turning a blind eye to this recommendation and to the longer-term consequences.
Among the groups with the strongest opposition to fracking and oil exploration, are, in general, coalitions of native tribes, community residents, and environmental groups. For example, in Colorado, residents fear a proposed fracking project will contaminate a local reservoir. In the big fracking states, these groups are suing with evidence-based claims that fracking is consuming and poisoning finite water resources and is a real health threat. One study found that pregnant women residing in the Eagle Ford Shale region of Texas “had 50 percent greater odds of giving birth prematurely than those who did not.”
The science points to very real risks though. The EPA has tracked 180,000 fracked wells and estimates that each day 2 billion gallons of toxic wastewater require safe disposal. This was water that was injected to fracture shale under pressure and then returned to the surface. A 2022 paper in the Journal of Health Economics concluded there is correlation with increased preterm births and low birth weight: “drilling near an infant’s public water source yields poorer birth outcomes and more fracking-related contaminants in public drinking water.”
For their part, the industry is “focused on meeting the growing demand for affordable, reliable energy while minimizing impacts on the environment,” according to the American Petroleum Institute’s Holly Hopkins. Confronted with university research that documents the ill health effects of fracking wells to local residents, the Marcellus Shale Coalition countered that these published studies “relied on statistical modeling rather than actual exposure,” adding that these are activists attempting to “drive more dollars to already well-funded activist organizations.” Monster frackers like BP are making public relations efforts to appease concerned communities, stating that they are “executing several pilot projects to recycle water to minimize freshwater usage.” Like BP, Chevron claims it uses “brackish or recycled water” for fracking.
Policy Analysis:
Not only is the United States the world’s largest exporter of liquefied natural gas, at fracking’s current pace of development there will be the equivalent of 454 new coal plants by 2050. The Permian basin is rich in oil and covers 86,000 square miles in Texas and accounts for 40% of all U.S. oil extraction. Wells there have to be drilled to longer and longer lengths to get at the oil and gas and that equates to vastly greater water requirements. “As the easier-to-extract areas are tapped to their full potential, you need to use more and more desperate measures,” said A.J. Kondash, a scientist with RTI International. Those desperate measures find justification by an industry that rests upon the fact that natural gas gives off about half the CO2 gas as coal.
Critics see a spiraling of negative environmental consequences as scarce aquifers, made even scarcer by droughts, are being depleted by fracking operations that contribute significantly to furthering global heat and drought. Jeremy Nichols, program director with WildEarth Guardians points to a glaring lack of political will. “While it’s shameful President Biden is not living up to his promise to pause new oil and gas leasing to protect the climate,” he emphasized, “it’s even more shameful he’s rubberstamped Trump-era leases.” And while the critics lament, industry supporters celebrate the U.S.’s deserved energy independence and a strengthened economy.
The shift to sustainable energy sources is far too slow to replace the carbon that fuels America. There needs to be a willingness among the majority of citizens to alter lifestyles, to change a culture of consumption. Lacking that, the drilling will continue unabated as a further sign of a fractured and fragile society.
Engagement Resources:
- https://e360.yale.edu/ Yale Environment 360 offers opinion, analysis, reporting, and debate on global environmental issues.
- https://environmentamerica.org/ is a national network of 30 state environmental groups. Their staff work together for clean air, clean water, clean energy, wildlife and open spaces, and a livable climate.
- https://www.niehs.nih.gov/ The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences is expanding and accelerating its contributions to scientific knowledge of human health and the environment, and to the health and well-being of people everywhere.
Will Airbnb Restrictions Save Renters?
Will Airbnb Restrictions Save Renters?
Technology Policy Brief #100 | By: Mindy Spatt | October 31, 2023
Photo taken from: kcur.org
__________________________________
Policy Summary
As Airbnb vacation rentals have proliferated in cities across the globe, local renters have seen rapidly rising prices and far fewer housing units available. Advocates are pushing back and winning restrictions. Whether or not the trend can be reserved may depend on how vigorously those restrictions can be enforced.
Policy Analysis
In the face of rising rents for fewer apartments, New York recently joined the list of cities restricting apartment owners from using their properties for short term rentals alone. New York’s new rules will limit short term rentals to no more than two guests at a time, and require hosts to reside in the unit they are offering. Under the regulations, owners must be able to prove residency or face fines of up to $5,000.
The change is expected to dramatically decrease the number of short term vacation rentals available in New York and consequently increase the very limited number of rentals available for people to live in, especially in the more popular neighborhoods. Neighbors hope for fewer problems with the noise, mess and disruptions that often come along with vacation rentals.
While Airbnb fought hard against the rules, claiming its’ presence in the city was purely beneficial, studies by the Harvard Business Review (HBR) and others confirm that an “increase in Airbnb listings is causally associated with an….increase in rental rates….and negatively correlated with the share of homes in the market for long-term rentals.” Other studies by the HBR found that racial discrimination was rampant on the platform, with fewer owners willing to rent to African Americans and African American hosts earning less money.
Here in the Bay Area, Oakland is considering new restrictions and city leaders are consulting major housing organizations including East Bay for Everyone, the Homeless Advocacy Working Group and the Oakland Tenant’s Union to hammer out the details. Limitations on renting out multiple properties similar to the New York rules are under consideration, including only allowing hosts to use their own residences for short term rentals. Also likely are limits on the number of nights a host can rent their property out. Advocates want Airbnb and other platforms held accountable for requiring hosts to be licensed. They also want a 24-hour hotline for neighbors to be able to report any issues related to short term rentals. For the rules to have the desired impact, they will have to be enforced.
In Los Angeles, where commercial hosts owning multiple properties is common, a Home Sharing Ordinance imposed similar restrictions on landlord hosts in 2019. However, three years after the restrictions were put in place, Better Neighbors LA released a study concluding “there remains an extraordinarily high rate of non-compliance by hosts and platforms. In the past year, an average of 4,272 STRs were advertised for rent each month, and, according to the City’s own data, more than half failed to comply” with the requirements of the ordinance.
According to the group, “The City exerted little effort to enforce the Ordinance, issuing only 27 fines and collecting a mere $9,827 for the entire year.” They conclude “the high level of illegal STR activity in LA is largely the result of the City’s failure to fully utilize certain enforcement measures…..”
Renters in New York and Oakland are surely hoping for better outcomes in their cities.
Engagement Resources:
- Better Neighbors LA, https://www.betterneighborsla.org
- Inside Airbnb- Adding Data to the Debate, http://insideairbnb.com/explore/
- The Use of Short-Term Rentals by Digital Nomads Is Pricing Out Residents of Mexico City. Here’s What the City Can Do about It, by Jorge González-Hermoso, Luisa Godinez-Puig, December 20, 2022, Urban Wire, https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/use-short-term-rentals-digital-nomads-pricing-out-residents-mexico-city-heres-what-city
The Russian-Ukraine War: Where are We Now?
The Russian-Ukraine War: Where are We Now?
Foreign Policy Brief #96 | By: Abran C | October 30, 2023
Photo taken from: cnbc.com
__________________________________
The last few weeks have seen two new wars spring up in our increasingly volatile international arena. First in late September the war for Nagorno-Karabakh between Azerbaijan and Armenia and more recently the war between Israel and Hamas which has captured global attention and shifted away from the war in Ukraine. Yet even though attention has waned as it nears the second anniversary of Russia’s invasion, the war remains very much deadly as it was just before additional conflicts were added to our increasingly unstable international community.
What’s happening on the battlefield right now?
Last week Ukraine’s Special Operations Forces claimed that a nighttime surprise attack on targets in eastern and southern Ukraine destroyed nine Russian helicopters, other military equipment, and killed multiple Russian soldiers at two airfields in Russian-occupied areas. The weapons used were long-range ballistic missiles delivered quietly by the United States after requests from Ukraine saying it urgently needed them to make any impactful territorial gains against the Russian army. The arrival of these weapons on the warfront gives Ukraine the ability to strike Russian targets that are farther away and inflict more damage, but also further deepens the US’ involvement in the war and runs the risk of wider conflict if the weapons are used to strike inside of Russia’s borders.
The Ukrainian military has ramped up strikes on Russian forces in the Black Sea and Crimea, which was seized and annexed by Moscow in 2014, as Ukrainian forces press on with their nearly five month-old counteroffensive. Ukrainian attacks in Crimea have included strikes on a Russian air base, a Black Sea Fleet command post in Sevastopol, and the bridge linking Crimea to Russia. The attacks have highlighted Kiev’s growing capabilities, which also include naval drones, as Moscow continues bombarding Ukraine from afar with long-range missiles and assault drones.
Throughout the war Russia has frequently conducted missile strikes on civilian infrastructure, the latest strike hit a postal terminal in the Kharkiv region on October 22, 2023 killing six people and injuring 16, officials have said. The strike came from Russian forces in the Belgorod region, near the Ukrainian border. Kharkiv, in northeastern Ukraine, was retaken from Russian occupation by Ukrainian troops last year, but has remained the target of frequent aerial assaults.
As a result of the fighting he UK’s Ministry of Defence reports that Russia has suffered 150,000-190,000 permanent casualties (killed or permanently wounded) since the war began. According to US stats Ukrainian deaths are close to 70,000, with 100,000 to 120,000 wounded.
Russia and Ukraines economy
The sanctions imposed by the US and its EU partners on Russia’s financial system were placed in an effort to reduce Russia’s ability to finance the war. In all, about 70% of assets of the Russian banking system are currently under sanctions. It is estimated that in 2022, Russia’s gross domestic product (GDP) dropped by 2.1% much less than the predicted 10-15% contraction. This is mostly due to Russia seeking out new non-Western trade partners and increasing trade with those it already has. Still its GDP is forecast to decline by 2.5% in the worst-case scenario (OECD). Since the invasion in February 2022, Ukraine GDP dropped by almost 30 percent in what the World Bank characterized as a “staggering contraction”. Ukraine’s 10 most economically important regions are in the eastern and southern parts of the country where the heaviest fighting has taken place. Poverty in Ukraine soared from 5.5% of the population to 24.2% in 2022. Though Ukraine’s allies have already pledged to help it recover whenever the war finally comes to an end. Ukraine’s large size and strategic location mean that recovery and future growth outcomes will profoundly shape the geopolitical landscape of Europe in the future.
The wars’ global impact
One of Russian President Vladimir Putin stated hopes for the invasion was the opportunity to split the West and NATO. Instead, the military alliance strengthened and increased its membership. Two new members in Finland and Sweden, which reversed decades of nonalignment and asked to join NATO as protection against possible future Russian invasion or interference.
The conflict has also hit food security around the world. Before the war, Ukraine and Russia together were the world’s largest exporter of wheat. They were responsible for over 36% of global wheat exports, and also exported more than half of the world’s sunflower oil. The Food Security Information Network highlights the war as a key force, alongside the pandemic, other conflicts and extreme weather, behind a staggering rise in the number of people who are food-insecure. Nearly 258 million people in 58 countries/territories were in a food crisis or moderate-to-severe acute food insecurity in 2022, up from 193 million in 53 countries/territories in 2021. This is the highest figure on record since the organization began reporting these data in 2017.
At least 5.9 million Ukrainians who have been forced to flee homes and country for new lives in communities across Europe and beyond. To date, there are almost 1 million Ukrainian refugees in Poland while other nearby countries Hungary, Romania, Slovakia and Moldova have each given safety to tens of thousands of Ukrainian refugees.
How will the war end?
Unfortunately it does not appear that the war will end anytime soon or with any clear direction. Both Russia and Ukraine’s armies remain locked in heavy fighting. Though we can still speculate what outcomes are possible based on what we have detailed thus far. With a Ukrainian victory, Kyiv has clearly defined what it would look like, it means a restoration of Ukraine’s territorial integrity within the pre-2014 borders and no Russia in Crimea, future security guarantees, criminal consequences for Russian war crimes and reparations for the material damage caused. Ukrainian membership in NATO and the European Union should also be on the agenda.
At first, Moscow’s aim in invading Ukraine was to take over the whole of the country and remove its legitimate, democratically elected government. After multiple fiascos and setbacks in the spring of 2022, the goal became simply taking control of as much of Ukraine as possible. It is unlikely either side will give in to the other, Russia will continue fighting because of the need to save face on the international stage. Ukraine will not want to seem to be giving up or giving in. The two sides have been and are likely to remain at a stalemate as neither side can fully beat back the other. So in order to avoid a prolonged war, as with all conflicts, the war must be brought to an end through diplomacy not continued aggression.
Congressional Support Lapses in the Fight Against Fentanyl
Congressional Support Lapses in the Fight Against Fentanyl
Health and Gender Policy Brief #166 | By: Geoffrey Small | October 30, 2023
Photo taken from: sbsun.com
__________________________________
Policy Summary:
In February, the CDC released data indicating that drug overdose deaths hit a record high in 2022. Eight states reported increased death rates from nine percent to twenty one percent last year. The access to social supports and healthcare has steadily increased since the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, and many believed that the data in 2022 would reflect a decrease in overdose deaths. However, one major driver of the reported increase undermined these expectations. The introduction of fentanyl in the United Sates is fueling the new wave of drug overdoses. This analysis will highlight the efforts that the federal government is undertaking to fight the burgeoning fentanyl crisis.
Policy Analysis:
The CDC reported that more than two thirds, or 68 percent, of overdose deaths were linked primarily to fentanyl in 2022. Many scholars believe this sharp rise to be the fourth wave in the historic drug overdose crisis. It started in the 90s to early 2000s with prescription opioids, a second wave involved increase heroin overdoses, and a third wave involved the introduction of fentanyl.
The FDA has recently taken measures to address the sharp increase in drug overdose deaths. In March 2023, the agency approved the first over-the-counter Naloxone nasal spray, stating the drug “is a lifesaving emergency treatment that reverses opioid overdose. It is a medicine with no abuse potential, and it is not a controlled substance.” These institutional beliefs mark a major change in the federal government’s perspective on opioid reversal drugs. During the second and third waves of overdose deaths, much of the public experienced a lack of access to this drug, due to state and federal regulations. For years, Naloxone was considered by federal and state governments as a drug that would enable more substance abuse. Most states only allowed police officers and paramedics to legally carry the nasal spray, which can immediately reverse a life-threatening overdose.
Congressional action has also had a complicated history with combating this overdose crisis. In 2018, the SUPPORT act was passed authorizing $20 billion for substance abuse prevention, treatment, and recovery. A reauthorization of the bill was introduced in July of this year. Unfortunately, Congress has not had the urgency to pass the new proposed law, allowing the 2018 SUPPORT act to eventually lapse on September 30th. As a result, funding is currently no longer available to families who desperately need help fighting the fourth wave of this devastating drug overdose crisis.
Without Congressional support, the fourth wave in the drug overdose crisis has many experts speculating that deaths will continue to reach record highs in the United States. The FDA’s recent approval of over-the-counter Naloxone marks a positive change in public access to treatment options. The stigma of the overdose-reversal nasal spray as an enabler for substance abuse, which prevented the public access to the vital lifesaving drug, is no longer an obstacle. Harm Reduction Therapeutics donated 200,000 doses of the nasal spray to the Remedy Alliance, a non-profit Naloxone advocacy organization, after FDA approval. This may help blunt the continued rise in deaths related to a burgeoning fentanyl crisis. However, Congress is currently preventing vital funding for prevention and recovery by allowing the SUPPORT act to lapse without the necessary reauthorization. Please contact your congressional representatives to highlight the need for SUPPORT act reauthorization. Also, consider donating to the Remedy Alliance to ensure they connect with harm reduction programs to provide free Naloxone for people in need.
Links to Donate:
- Remedy Alliance, https://givebutter.com/ScOTky
Gig Economy Insights: Benefits, Drawbacks, and the Future of Freelancing
Gig Economy Insights: Benefits, Drawbacks, and the Future of Freelancing
Economic Policy Brief #56 | By: Inijah Quadri | October 26, 2023
Photo taken from: freelancer.com/
__________________________________
Policy Summary:
In the age of digital transformation, the gig economy has emerged as a significant paradigm shift. Platforms like Uber, Airbnb, Upwork, and Fiverr have become the bridges connecting freelancers with opportunities, altering the traditional employment landscape. While the gig economy’s unique framework promotes flexibility and autonomy, it also ushers in concerns related to worker stability, rights, and unpredictable earnings
Policy Analysis:
The gig economy’s charm lies in its inherent flexibility. Workers can decide their schedules, work environments, and project preferences, leading to improved job satisfaction and a harmonious work-life equilibrium. This autonomy allows individuals to design their career paths, potentially leading to diversified income sources and multiple engagements.
On the corporate front, the gig economy introduces a flexible talent acquisition model. Companies can access a global pool of freelancers, ensuring they get the right fit for specific tasks without the strings of permanent employment. This strategy often results in cost savings and enhanced operational efficiencies.
Yet, the gig ecosystem is not devoid of challenges. For one, the perks of traditional employment—health benefits, retirement plans, and paid holidays—remain out of reach for many freelancers. The transition of these responsibilities from companies to individual workers has induced significant strains, both financially and operationally.
Various governments worldwide have initiated policies to regulate the gig economy. For instance, at the federal level, there have been discussions on classifying gig workers as independent contractors or employees, impacting their entitlement to benefits and protections. At the state level, states such as California have tried to address this with laws like Assembly Bill 5 (AB5) aimed at providing gig workers with employee rights. The outcomes and status of such efforts remain contested, with some supporting and others opposing these regulations.
Irrespective, at present, many freelancers find themselves navigating the murky waters of inconsistent payments, vague contract terms, or even outright non-payment scenarios. This unpredictability can be taxing, both mentally and financially. The solitary nature of freelance work can also lead to feelings of disconnect, missing out on team dynamics, and difficulties in demarcating work and personal boundaries.
A significant point of contention remains the ambiguous relationship between gig platforms and freelancers. As these platforms primarily function as facilitators, the lines defining accountability and responsibilities often blur. This vagueness has been the root cause of numerous legal disputes across the globe. Many freelancers push for more defined rights, whereas platforms are wary of categorizing them under conventional employment umbrellas.
Examples of gig workers’ efforts to advocate for their rights are abundant. For instance, Starbucks baristas have formed unions to push for better work conditions and benefits. Uber drivers, especially in the UK, have taken legal actions against the company, arguing for the status of employees rather than independent contractors. Such efforts have sometimes resulted in policy changes and heightened awareness, though the success rates and outcomes vary from case to case.
Looking Ahead
Given the current momentum, the gig economy’s expansion appears to be a given. The increasing global inclination towards remote and flexible work, propelled further by technological breakthroughs, will further attract individuals to the freelancing world.
For a harmonious coexistence, however, a balanced approach is imperative. Regulatory bodies need to devise innovative policies that safeguard freelancers’ rights without hampering the gig economy’s core essence of flexibility. This could potentially mean conceptualizing a unique employment category tailored for gig workers. Or, just as is being proposed in Japan, this could mean refining existing laws to offer freelance workers better protections.
Platforms also need to introspect and possibly adapt their models to better cater to freelancer needs. This could entail providing direct benefits, imparting training resources, or refining their payment infrastructures for more clarity and punctuality.
Central to all these discussions and reforms should be the freelancers themselves. As the nucleus of the gig economy, it’s their experiences, hurdles, and visions that should shape the future trajectory of this dynamic work landscape. They should be proactive in voicing their concerns and needs. As with most causes, it is the voice of the freelancer that should resonate loudest, as it may just hold the key to a sustainable future.
Engagement Resources:
- Freelance Informer (https://freelanceinformer.com/): A news site dedicated to the freelance world, providing insights, trends, and advice for gig workers.
- Freelancers Union (https://www.freelancersunion.org/): An organization advocating for the rights of freelance workers, offering resources, community support, and benefits tailored to the needs of freelancers.
- Gig Workers Rising (https://www.gigworkersrising.org/): An initiative focused on educating and mobilizing gig workers to secure better protections, pay, and benefits.
- Gig Economy Data Hub (https://www.gigeconomydata.org/): A comprehensive resource providing statistics, studies, and insights into the gig economy’s evolution and impact.
- Platform Cooperativism Consortium (https://platform.coop/): An initiative advocating for democratically owned and governed platforms, allowing gig workers a say in the platforms they work on.
An Analysis Of The Gag Orders In Criminal Cases Against Former President Trump
An Analysis Of The Gag Orders In Criminal Cases Against Former President Trump
Civil Rights Policy Brief #213 | By: Rodney A. Maggay | October 25, 2023
Photo taken from: cnbc.com
__________________________________
Policy Summary:
Over the last two months former President Donald Trump has been issued a gag order in two separate criminal cases against him.
In New York, the former President is facing criminal charges of civil fraud brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James. That case accuses Donald Trump and his sons of fraudulently inflating his personal net worth in order to acquire bank loans on more favorable terms. In the months leading up to the trial, the court issued Trump a limited gag order in order to try and limit some of his inflammatory comments while allowing him to still speak on public issues. However, on his social media account Truth Social, the former President posted a statement attacking one of Judge Arthur Engoron’s law clerks and implied that the law clerk had had an inappropriate relationship with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. (Judge Engoron is the judge overseeing the civil fraud trial). The disparaging post was taken down from the Truth Social site but was not taken down from a separate Trump campaign website. Judge Engoron subsequently fined Trump for the delay in taking down the post from his campaign website but also warned Trump and his legal team that more severe sanctions would be considered, including being held in contempt of court and even jail time, if Trump and his team did not abide by the limited gag order and if they continued to ignore the court’s orders.
In Washington D.C., President Trump is facing four criminal charges in connection with his attempt to subvert the 2020 presidential election. The trial is scheduled to begin on March 4, 2024 before Judge Tonya Chutkan. In recent weeks, former President Trump on his social media platforms and in public speeches has attacked witnesses, prosecutors (he referred to them as thugs) and court staff. In response, Judge Chutkan issued a gag order that barred the former President from making inflammatory and derogatory statements aimed at court personnel. Judge Chutkan stated “First Amendment protections yield to the administration of justice and to the protection of witnesses.” However, on October 20th, Judge Chutkan agreed to temporarily stay her gag order in order to permit Trump’s attorneys to argue before her why the President should not be restricted in his public comments. Judge Chutkan also ordered special counsel Jack Smith’s team to file their arguments opposing the lifting of the restrictions and gag order on comments made by Trump. Additionally, Trump’s lawyers filed an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE
Policy Analysis:
Former President Trump is facing separate criminal charges for separate actions in separate courts yet the gag orders issued in the separate cases have a common theme running through both of them. How should a court balance the First Amendment Free Speech rights of a criminal defendant with a court’s role in maintaining operations of the court and in administering justice?
A closer analysis of both of the gag order situations reveals that the Trump team’s arguments for Free Speech rights for their client have been mischaracterized. In the New York case, Trump’s comments were directed at a court staffer in order to smear her, the court and indirectly, Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer. In the D.C. election subversion case, Trump’s comments there followed a similar pattern. The statements he made about Special Counsel Jack Smith and his team of prosecutors was intended to again smear and belittle court personnel who were simply doing their jobs. Both instances show an intent to intimidate people out of the President’s anger and frustration and it was a point singled out by Judge Chutkan.
In a hearing to determine the scope of the gag order in the D.C. case, Judge Chutkan acknowledged that Trump’s rhetoric could intimidate witnesses and the jury pool and could influence some of Trump’s followers to violence. But noting that there were legitimate free speech concerns, she brilliantly divided Trump’s comments into five categories and grilled Trump’s lawyers on what could be an appropriate restriction in each scenario. There were Trump comments on the people of Washington, D.C., comments on the Biden Administration, comments on the prosecutors, comments on the court and finally comments on the witnesses. Judge Chutkan declined to add further restrictions on the first two categories because of Trump’s free speech rights to talk about public policy issues (crime in D.C. and criticism of Biden’s Administration) and because he is a presidential candidate who would be expected to weigh in on these matters. However, with the last three Judge Chutkan drew a line that targeting court staff, witnesses or the prosecutors and their family were unacceptable because of the potential for violence against them to help Trump in some way. She stated that all criminal defendants are rarely permitted to interfere with court operations or proceedings with inflammatory speech. A criminal defendant running for President of the United States next year should not be given a free speech exception to intimidate, harass and potentially place in harm’s way court staff and personnel or their families. While balancing what a political candidate can say and preventing possible harm is entwined with Tump’s case, Judge Chutkan gets it right when she broke down Trump’s comments into categories and singles out the attempts at harassment and intimidation as speech not being worthy of free speech protections.
All four of Trump’s criminal cases are moving forward towards trial. So, it will be interesting to see if the former President will abide by the court’s rulings on what he can say or if he will ignore them and face potentially stiffer penalties, including jail time.
Engagement Resources:
- Vox – explanation of the gag order against Trump and possible consequences if he violates it.
- Free Speech Center – analysis of the gag order against Trump.
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.
