Sign up for updates
Donate today
Join our newsletter
JOBS

JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES

The Jobs and Infrastructure domain tracks and reports on policies that deal with job creation and employment, unemployment insurance and job retraining, and policies that support investments in infrastructure. This domain tracks policies emanating from the White House, the US Congress, the US Department of Labor, the US Department of Transportation, and state policies that respond to policies at the Federal level. Our Principal Analyst is Vaibhav Kumar who can be reached at vaibhav@usresistnews.org.

Latest Jobs Posts

 

Mark Meadows

Brief #115 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by Abigail Hunt

Mark Meadows looks hungover in his mugshot… indicted in October 2023 on charges for attempting to overturn the 2020 election results in Georgia, Meadows has good reason to drink.

read more
Jobs01 e1489352304814
Violence Against Women

Violence Against Women


Violence Against Women

Social Justice Policy Brief #149 | By: Abigail Hunt | October 11, 2023

Photo taken from: sbs.com.au

__________________________________

It should cause us all consternation when society rewards men for spouting dangerous rhetoric, while it chastises and punishes women for expressing the same sentiments. In 2017, comedian Kathy Griffin posed with a severed costume head of Trump. As soon as her photos went viral, society cancelled her.

The year before Griffin was cancelled, an audio recording of Trump proudly describing both his failed sexual assault of a woman – “I moved on her like a bitch…” – and his tactic for approaching women in general – “grab ‘em by the pussy” – had made the rounds in the press and helped elect him to the Presidency. It was an eye-opening message to send the women of the nation. Trump spoke a language of violence against women, and he was applauded for it. The underlying misogyny in our world is not in any way hidden. It is an ingrained dislike of women that is increasingly rampant.

For a young woman in the U.S. by her mid-twenties, the odds are one in four she will experience violence at the hands of an intimate partner. The World Health Organization (WHO) reports stark statistics – worldwide, one in three women suffer physical or sexual violence by an intimate partner or sexual violence from a non-partner. Victims, fearing blame or shame, will often fail to report an assault.

Considering the statistics – Women should be angry. Men are victims of simple assaults more often than women; according to Criminal Victimization Statistics from the Bureau of Justice Statistics, last updated July 2023. However, excluding simple assaults, women are more often victims of serious violent crime.

Women are not allowed to be angry, however. A 2015 Arizona State University small-scale study of 210 undergraduates showed that angry men gained credibility with the student participants later surveyed, while angry women lost it. In much of western society, parents, coaches, and teachers tell boys from an early age to “suck it up and be a man” when they are sad, cry, or show any vulnerability. Sports, by design, rewards aggressiveness. Many contact sports glorify violence.

In American society, male figures with anger issues are often portrayed sympathetically in the media. The Incredible Hulk and the X-Men’s Wolverine are two characters with undeniable anger issues which have generated multimillion – if not billion – dollar franchises. Conversely, women with anger issues are seen as unhinged.

This past summer, the Barbie movie smashed records with a female-directed, female-led, female-centric film bashing the patriarchy. So far, the movie has grossed $1.4 billion in the 10 weeks since its release in theaters, ranking it #14 in worldwide popularity ranking for movies of all time. The central message of the Barbie movie is clear – the patriarchy is bad, bad for women, bad for Barbie, and even bad for men. Once Ken learns the patriarchy is not all about horses, he loses interest because, as the movie shows, the stress of the men running everything made him unhappy and irritable. The takeaway viewers are left with is that either side having total control is not good. The message that men and women should work together to buoy their weaknesses with one another’s strengths is something our Presidents, Congress, and all politicians must learn if we ever hope to rebalance our nation’s gross inequities in wealth, health, education, and quality of life.

Engagement Resources:

 

Examining Competitive US House Races in the Northeast

Examining Competitive US House Races in the Northeast


Examining Competitive US House Races in the Northeast

Elections & Politics Policy Brief #99 | By: Ian Milden | October 3, 2023
Photo taken from: keystonenewsroom.com

__________________________________

Democrats lost their majority in the House of Representatives in the 2022 mid-term elections. However, the small size of the Republican majority leaves Democrats with a path to re-take the House majority. This brief will take an early look at some of the races in the northeastern United States (outside of New York, which I already previewed).

Analysis

Republicans shocked many pundits by only winning a four-seat majority in the House of Representatives during the midterm elections. While Democrats control a lot of seats in the northeast (including every seat in New England), there are still important races in the region that can affect the balance of power in the House of Representatives.

The clearest target in the northeast outside of New York is New Jersey’s 7th district, which Tom Kean Jr. won in 2022 by defeating Congressman Tom Malinowski (D-NJ). Kean Jr. is the son of a former governor of New Jersey and served in Republican leadership in the New Jersey state legislature, so he is well-connected within the New Jersey Republican Party. Democrats will need to recruit a very good candidate if they are going to defeat him in 2024.

In Pennsylvania’s first district, Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA) holds a seat that often votes for Democrats for other offices. His family is well-respected in the district. The district is located in the suburbs near Philadelphia, which have voted for Democrats by increasingly large margins. It would take an exceptional candidate and a bad year for Republicans for Democrats to win this seat.

One long-shot district that Democrats should keep an eye on is Pennsylvania’s 10th district, which is represented by Scott Perry (R-PA). The district is near Harrisburg. In normal circumstances, Perry’s district is a district where Democrats should only expect to compete when Republicans are having a really bad year. However, this race could develop into a competitive race if Perry is further engulfed in the scandals related to Trump’s attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 Presidential Election. Congressman Perry’s phone has been seized by the FBI as part of this investigation.

There are a pair of Democrats in Pennsylvania who have districts that have become increasingly difficult for Democrats to win in. Congressman Matt Cartwright (D-PA) represents the 8th district based in Scranton and Wilkes-Barre. Congresswoman Susan Wild (D-PA) represents the 7th district, which is based in Allentown, which is directly south of Cartwright’s district. These two districts have blue-collar union towns, which Democrats have struggled to win in the last few election cycles. If Democrats continue to lose more voters who live in areas like these, these districts will eventually be represented by Republicans.

Another district in Pennsylvania that Democrats will have to defend is the 17th district, which is represented by Chris Deluzio (D-PA). This district is northwest of Pittsburgh. Deluzio is in his first term. He won the seat that was vacated by Conor Lamb (D-PA). Before Lamb won a special election, Republican Tim Murphy represented the district for nearly two decades before resigning due to a scandal.

Democrats will also have to defend an open seat in New Jersey’s 3rd district since Congressman Andy Kim (D-NJ) decided to run against Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) after Menendez was indicted on federal corruption charges. Kim won the seat he now represents in 2018 by defeating incumbent Tom MacArthur (R-NJ). While Kim has done well in the past few elections, his seat is still in competitive territory.

The other major concern for Democrats defending seats in the northeast is Maine’s second district, which is represented by Jared Golden (D-ME). Maine’s second district does have a recent history of supporting Republicans including Trump in 2020. Golden was re-elected in 2020 when facing an underfunded opponent.

Both of New Hampshire’s seats could become competitive if Democrats are having a difficult election cycle. Chris Pappas and Ann Kuster are the current representatives of New Hampshire’s two congressional districts. Republicans have indicated that they will focus on trying to defeat Pappas since his district is less difficult for them to win in. However, New Hampshire Republicans have not had a good track record in recent years of recruiting and supporting candidates who can win federal offices.

Engagement Resources:

China’s Geopolitical Influence Around the World: Should We Be Worried?

China’s Geopolitical Influence Around the World: Should We Be Worried?


China’s Geopolitical Influence Around the World: Should We Be Worried?

Foreign Policy Brief #92 | By: Inijah Quadri | October 2, 2023

Photo taken from: atlanticcouncil.org

__________________________________

In recent years, China’s geopolitical influence has been expanding across continents, leaving a distinct imprint on global politics, economics, and societies. This influence is wielded through economic initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), tech dominance, diplomatic engagements, and soft power avenues such as Confucius Institutes. The rapid ascent has initiated a discourse evaluating the repercussions and urging the international community to decipher whether China’s expanding footprint should be a matter of concern, specifically concerning economic dependence, cybersecurity, and democratic values. The international community finds itself at a crossroads, where it needs to strike a balance between harnessing opportunities arising from cooperation with China and mitigating potential risks.

Analysis

Economic Dependence vs. Autonomous Growth:

China’s mammoth economic initiatives, such as the BRI, are seen as double-edged swords. On one hand, they promise to bolster economic growth in partnering nations through infrastructural development and increased trade avenues. On the other hand, they raise the specter of debt-trap diplomacy, whereby nations find themselves in a spiral of debt, essentially ceding significant control to China. Navigating this dynamic requires a nuanced approach, where nations engage with China but retain their economic autonomy through diversified partnerships and transparent agreements.

Cybersecurity and Digital Sovereignty:

China’s technological advancement comes with an intricate web of concerns surrounding cybersecurity and digital sovereignty. The deployment of Chinese tech infrastructure globally, including 5G networks, has raised alarms regarding potential espionage and data security. Countries are grappling with the choice between adopting advanced yet potentially vulnerable systems and safeguarding their digital landscapes. Addressing this issue calls for an international collaborative approach to formulating robust cybersecurity norms and standards, guided by the principles of transparency and mutual respect for digital sovereignty.

Democratic Values and Human Rights:

The rise of China presents a conflicting model juxtaposed against democratic values and human rights. The alleged human rights violations in regions like Xinjiang and the curtailing of freedoms in Hong Kong underscore the need for a global dialogue on preserving democratic values. The international community faces the imperative of fostering a dialogue that encourages adherence to universal human rights while engaging in constructive diplomacy with China.

Fostering Global Collaboration:

There are an increasing number of global issues that affect the well being of alll countries and all people; for example the issue of climate change where the well being of the planet cannot afford to have  individual countries like China continue to expand upon their use of fossil fuels. Or global health issues where nations need to be united in fighting world-wide pandemics and cannot afford having counties like China remain secretive about the origins or spread of Covid 19 within their borders

To craft a pathway forward, it is pivotal to foster international collaborations grounded in mutual respect and understanding. Countries must work together to develop strategies that leverage opportunities for economic growth, uphold cybersecurity standards, and champion the principles of democracy and human rights.

Engagement Resources:

  • Council on Foreign Relations (https://www.cfr.org/): The CFR provides in-depth analyses and reports on China’s geopolitical strategies and global relations, helping readers comprehend the intricacies of China’s evolving role on the world stage.
  • China Power Project (https://chinapower.csis.org/): This initiative by CSIS delves deep into the various dimensions of China’s rise as a global power, offering insights into its economic initiatives, military advancements, and soft power instruments.
  • Human Rights Watch (https://www.hrw.org/): For individuals keen on understanding the human rights dimension of China’s global engagements, HRW offers reports and analyses grounded in meticulous research, providing a comprehensive view of the prevailing human rights conditions in regions influenced by China’s policies.
The United Auto Workers (UAW): Who Are They? Why Are They On Strike? Why Does It Matter?

The United Auto Workers (UAW): Who Are They? Why Are They On Strike? Why Does It Matter?


The United Auto Workers (UAW): Who Are They? Why Are They On Strike? Why Does It Matter? 

Economic Policy Brief #55 | By: Arvind Salem | October 2, 2023

Photo taken from: clickondetroit.com

__________________________________

The International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW) is one of the largest and most diverse unions in North America, with members in virtually every sector of the economy.On September 15th, The United Auto Workers (UAW) implemented a targeted (“Stand Up”) strike after the expiration of their 4 year contracts. The Union is on strike against Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis: the first time that the union has struck against all three simultaneously in its history.

The UAW is implementing a targeted strike , where they call certain plants to strike, not all of them at once. This is an incredibly calculated decision, which allows the UAW to inflict the most harm by having the workers of the most profitable plants go on strike, while everyone else works. This means that the strike represents less of an expense for UAW (i.e. less money needed to support these workers from the strike fund) but inflicts the most damage on the auto companies. If all members of the UAW went on strike it would cost them $70 million a week: quickly draining their $825 million strike fund within three months, but now the UAW can support their workers for much longer (strikers currently get $500 per week in addition to health benefits). Additionally, if the companies attempt to cut costs by closing down facilities, the union members at those facilities will be eligible for unemployment benefits and not deplete the UAW strike fund.

UAW initially targeted GM’s Wentzville, Missouri (3,600 UAW members), Ford’s Michigan Assembly plant in Wayne, Michigan (3300 strikers),and Stellantis’ Toledo Assembly complex (5,800 strikers). This represents less than 1300 of UAW’s 145,000 members: less than 1% of UAW members.

The UAW strike comes at a time of record union activism: most prominently the strikes by Hollywood screenwriters and actors and raises for United Parcel Service employees in an agreement negotiated by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters.

Additionally, these car companies are experiencing record profits, but essentially keeping in place the same agreements that workers took to help these companies stay afloat in 2008. The UAW argues that now is the time to pay back the concessions they made in 2008 and protect them in the future, while a key argument the automakers make is that they need to use their profits to invest in the costly transition to electric vehicles, where they are already behind non-unionized companies like Tesla.

The union’s specific demands relate to four main categories: wages, cost of living adjustments, eliminating the two- tiered payment system, and job security in the transition to electric vehicles.

The first demand, wages, is a demand for a 40% general wage increase for UAW members over a four year contract. The companies have offered a raise of approximately 20% due to pressure from the strike, but are still well short of the union’s demands. The union points to the Big Three’s profits of $21 billion total in just the first half year and the fact that they agreed, in 2007, to freeze their base wages for 4 years to help the company survive. Now that the company is doing good, the UAW argues that they should be compensated for all they gave up, especially given the fact that the highest paid CEO of the three (GM CEO Mary Barra) makes 362 times the median GM employee’s salary and the average hourly worker’s salary has dropped over 20% in the last two years when adjusting for inflation.

The second demand is for a robust cost of living adjustment (COLA) system to ensure that the gains are not eaten away by inflation. COLA was something that the UAW gave up in the 2007 negotiations, but has sorely missed throughout the last decade, particularly with the high inflation in 2022. If the workers had the old COLA formula, estimated to provide a 90% protection against inflation, their base pay would’ve increased almost the exact same amount as the crippling 9% inflation in the United States during the summer of 2022. The automakers have put a version of COLA on the table, but the union does not believe that it would meaningfully protect against inflation like the old formula did.

The third demand is to eliminate the two-tiered wage system. Workers who joined after 2007 were paid less than those hired before to do the exact same job. They also receive less healthcare and pension. In 2019, UAW and the companies agreed to an 8 year progression, where a new hire can work their way up to the pay of their pre-2007 peers over the span of 8 years. UAW is advocating for a 90 day progression, while the auto companies have countered with 4 years.

The fourth major demand is job security with the arrival of EVs. The UAW wants a guaranteed right to strike over plant closures and some compensation if plants shut down. The auto companies’ precise counter offers on this issue is unclear, but they are demanding the unilateral right to close and sell 18 facilities, which the UAW refuses to accept.

A week after the initial strike, on September 22, the UAW expanded their strike against GM and Stellantis to include all of their spare parts distribution centers, but notably excluding Ford from these extensions. The union said that Ford showed progress in their talks by notably reinstating a cost of living adjustment and granting the union the right to strike over plant closures. This new extension will add another 5,600 distribution workers to the 13,000 auto workers already on strike.

Analysis

A strike of this magnitude has multiple downstream effects on the economy at large and represents a key political moment for both parties to court the support of the UAW by showing solidarity at this time and make their position on organized labor clear through their actions.

Of course, the effects of the strike depend on how long it lasts and what actions the unions are willing to take, which is impossible to know at this time. However, even in such a short time, the strike could hinder economic growth, especially when the country faces other economic obstacles such as higher oil prices and higher mortgage rates. This strike may further short term inflation in the auto market and incentivize consumers to buy cars from non-union companies (many of which are foreign). The United States economy lost over $5 billion in the first 10 days of the UAW auto strike.

Most of the damage will not be done on a national level: but concentrated at the local level. Businesses around Detroit that typically serve these workers, such as restaurants, are adversely affected, since the workers do not have as much money to spend there. There is the danger that if this becomes a particularly long and expensive strike, automakers may start to move away from Michigan, taking countless jobs with them, which is what Boeing did in 2008: moving some production to anti-union  South Carolina after a long strike.

Despite the economic hardship that this strike causes, it’s worth noting that overall support for the UAW strike has been trending upward, while support for the exact demands has been trending downwards, indicating that the American public has a broad pro-union sentiment, at least for now, despite not agreeing with their demands.

Both President Biden and Trump have used this strike to court the union’s support. President Biden joined the picket line on the 26th: the first modern president to visit a picket line, and a significant show of his support for organized labor. Notably, the union has not yet endorsed Biden in the 2024 election and while many workers appreciate his support, they said a visit from the president would not necessarily change their vote. The day after, in lieu of the Republican debates, Donald Trump visited a non-union auto parts supplier, looking to capitalize upon the UAW’s discontent with the Biden administration’s push for electric vehicles, which they believe will cost them many jobs. The autoworkers represent a powerful interest, which both presidents narrowly won and carries with it a great prize in the Electoral College. Both Trump and Biden are clearly trying to cement themselves in the UAW’s good graces before the general election. Biden seems to be courting union leadership by picketing with them, while Trump is mainly trying to court the vote of the union’s blue-collar base, by giving a speech that aligns with their interests but does not gain him favor with union leadership, as he gave it in a non-union manufacturer.

Engagement Resources

  • UAW The UAW is the union organizing this strike. Those who sympathize with their cause may wish to donate to this organization.
  • Ford Ford has been determined to be the most union friendly out of the three companies. Those who would like to reward them for that practice may wish to support them.
  • Joe Biden for President Joe Biden has shown support for these workers and the union. Readers who agree with his actions in this issue may wish to donate or otherwise contribute to the campaign.
Congress to Blame for the Child Poverty Rate

Congress to Blame for the Child Poverty Rate


Congress to Blame for the Child Poverty Rate 

Health and Gender Policy Brief #165 | By: Geoffrey Small | October 2, 2023

Photo taken from: brookings.edu

__________________________________

On September 12th, the Census Bureau released a report on the current poverty rates in the United States. The report indicated that the official overall poverty rate didn’t significantly change. Black individuals also reported 2022 poverty rates as the “lowest on record.” Despite the overall stability and positive trends across racial boundaries, one categorical poverty rate lies in stark contrast. The Census Bureau reported that between 2021 and 2022, child poverty has “more than doubled.” A Brookings Institute study illustrates why the child poverty rate has dramatically increased in the United States. This policy analysis will explore the benefits of the Child Tax Credit, an act that was allowed to expire by Congress, as the main factor contributing to the overall reduction of child poverty in 2021 and its drastic increase in 2022.

Policy Analysis

In 2021, Congress passed the American Rescue Plan Act, which was a stimulus package designed to support Americans financially during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Child Tax Credit was part of the stimulus, which provided a historic increase from the original $2,000 per child to $3,000 for children 6 years and over, as well as $3,600 for children under 6. Families also received this stimulus in sums of $250 to $300 per child each month automatically. However, on December 30th, 2021, Congress let the American Rescue Plan Act expire by not voting to renew it. As a result, monthly payments stopped, and the credit reverted back to $2,000 per child. Senator Bernie Sanders was on record stating that the Senate did not have enough votes to move forward with continuing the Child Tax Credit. He blames centrist Democratic Senator Joe Manchin and Independent Senator Kyrsten Sinema for not pledging to vote in favor of a continued increase, which would ensure a majority vote. With Republicans maintaining a House majority, there was no hope for a vote in favor of continuing the increased tax credit.

The Brookings Institute conducted a study, which indicated that the Child Tax Credit reduced poverty across all states with different cost-characteristics. However, the most dramatic reduction was in states with a low cost of living and high poverty rate. As a result of this tax credit increase, The Census Bureau reported that child poverty fell to 5.2%, the lowest rate in history.

After Congress failed to renew the American Rescue Plan Act, the 2022 census reported the first increase in their supplemental poverty measurement since 2010, which is a more nuanced assessment when compared to the official poverty rate. More significantly, the rate of child poverty increased from 5.2% in 2021 to 12.4% in 2022. This rate has more than doubled since tax credits have reverted back to the original amount.

The Brookings Institute states that “child poverty is a persistent national issue with lifetime and intergenerational consequences.”  When policies change, it is generally hard to place accountability on one branch of government, and it may take years to fully assess the impacts of these decisions. However, the evidence that has been presented in relation to child poverty between 2021 and 2022 holds an incontrovertible truth. As a result of congressional inaction, this branch of government is solely responsible for the drastic increase in the rate of child poverty. We must hold our congressional officials accountable by calling our representatives and urging them to atone for this grave error by renewing the child tax credit. UNICEF USA is an organization that is working to spread the word and help resolve the renewed child poverty crisis. Please consider donating to their movement.

Links to Donate:

https://www.unicefusa.org/?form=donate

Online Dating Evolution: Technology’s Influence on Modern Relationships

Online Dating Evolution: Technology’s Influence on Modern Relationships


Online Dating Evolution: Technology’s Influence on Modern Relationships

Social Justice Policy Brief #148 | By: Inijah Quadri | September 28, 2023

Photo taken from: dailymail.co.uk

__________________________________

In the burgeoning digital age, the realm of online dating stands as a testament to the evolution of relationships under technology’s sway. Advancements in artificial intelligence (AI), big data analytics, and machine learning have redefined the rules of engagement in the pursuit of love. As dating transitions further into the digital sphere, the question of how technology influences autonomy, consent, and equity in romantic relationships has risen to the fore. The rapid transformation necessitates a deeper exploration of the ethical dimensions, calling for policy measures that facilitate safe and meaningful connections while preserving individual rights and freedoms.

Analysis

The Algorithm of Attraction:

As AI takes the reins in suggesting potential matches based on a plethora of factors ranging from shared interests to behavioral patterns, the mystery of attraction is being decoded into algorithms. However, this mechanization of matchmaking raises valid concerns over the natural spontaneity and unpredictability that characterize romantic relationships. While AI strives to find the ‘perfect match,’ it is imperative to ensure that technology serves as a facilitator rather than a dictator of romantic connections, preserving the human essence of love and attraction. Here are some suggested principles that can guide the pratice of online dating.

Informed Consent in Virtual Interactions:

Online dating platforms house an array of personal information, making informed consent more crucial than ever in safeguarding privacy and fostering trust. Users need to be unequivocally aware of the kind of information they share and with whom, averting potential misuse. This necessitates transparent and user-friendly privacy policies that empower individuals to control their digital footprints confidently. Moreover, platforms must invest in robust security measures, creating a safe environment that respects user consent and promotes respectful interactions.

Equality and Representation in Virtual Dating Spaces:

In the world of online dating, the design of platforms and algorithms can inadvertently influence user experiences and expectations. It is vital to champion diversity and inclusivity, ensuring that all users, irrespective of their background, find representation and feel seen and respected. Policies must encourage platforms to adopt a holistic approach, considering various cultural, racial, and personal nuances while creating algorithms to facilitate connections that are both authentic and respectful.

In navigating these emerging dynamics, a collaborative approach involving technologists, psychologists, relationship experts, and policymakers becomes essential. Transparent and user-friendly privacy policies, coupled with educational resources like those provided by The National Cyber Security Alliance, can foster a culture of informed consent, empowering users to navigate digital spaces safely. Collaborative efforts involving organizations like The Representation Project can also be a stepping stone to nurturing authentic and respectful connections. These can foster genuine connections while safeguarding user rights, encouraging educational initiatives to promote digital literacy in online dating, and fostering a culture of respect and consent, paving the way for a future where technology brings hearts closer, responsibly, and ethically.

Engagement Resources:

  • The Online Dating Association (https://www.onlinedatingassociation.org.uk/): An organization committed to setting standards for dating services and ensuring a safe and positive experience for users through policy-making and ethical considerations.
  • Centre for Humane Technology (https://www.humanetech.com/): A center dedicated to realigning technology with humanity’s best interests, fostering strategies and policies that prioritize well-being and promote respectful digital interactions.
  • eSafety Commissioner (https://www.esafety.gov.au/): An Australian government website offering a range of resources, from educational materials to reporting tools, facilitating a safe and positive online dating experience for all users.
The Civilian Climate Corps Unveiled to Combat Climate Change

The Civilian Climate Corps Unveiled to Combat Climate Change


The Civilian Climate Corps Unveiled to Combat Climate Change

Environmental Policy Brief #161 | By: Carlos Avalos | September 27, 2023

Photo taken from: insideclimatenews.org

__________________________________

On 9/20/23 The Civilian Climate Corps has been unveiled by President Joe Biden but has been in the works since January 27, 2021, when he handed down Executive Order on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad. In SEC 215 of the Executive Order the Civilian Climate Corps Initiative was created. The Civilian Climate Corps is an interagency partnership between AmeriCorps, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Departments of Labor, Interior, Agriculture, and Energy. The aim of the Civilian Climate Corps as stated in the Executive order is to mobilize the next generation of conservationists and maximize the creation of accessible training opportunities and good jobs. “The initiative shall aim to conserve and restore public lands and waters, bolster community resilience, and increase reforestation.” Its aim is to also increase carbon sequestration in the agricultural sector, protect biodiversity, improve access to recreation, and address the changing climate.”

Analysis

It is estimated that this new climate jobs training program could put up to 20,000 people to work in the first year. This initiative is modeled after the Civilian Conservation Corps, which was a New Deal program created by Franklin D. Roosevelt that put millions of young men to work during the Great Depression. The aim of the Civilian Conservation Corps was to restore public lands and building out national parks. President Biden’s Climate Policy advisor Ali Zaidi stated, “this initiative not only is addressing climate change, one of the most pressing issues that the world faces today, but it’s paving the way for good paying careers, and making our communities more fair, more sustainable, and more resilient.” The Civilian Climate Corps will pay people and most of the positions will not require previous experience. After someone completes the Civilian Climate Corps President Joe Biden is advocating for new regulations aimed at making it easier for participants to enter the federal public service.

In comparison to the Civilian Conservation Corps which ran for a decade and employed millions of people; The Civilian Climate Corps is on a much smaller scale, at least for now. Another glaring key difference is that the Civilian Conservation Corps employed young White men. While the Civilian Climate Corps is designed to attract participants from disadvantaged communities disproportionately impacted by the changing climate.

One of the first major partnerships under President Biden’s Civilian Climate Corps are between AmeriCorps and the US Forest Service to establish the new AmeriCorps NCCC Forest Corps. AmeriCorps is the federal agency for national service and volunteerism. AmeriCorps provides opportunities for Civilians of all backgrounds to serve their country, address the nation’s most pressing challenges, and improve lives and communities. The six key areas of the Americorps are disaster services, education, healthy futures, Veterans and military families, environmental stewardship, and economic opportunity. This is a five-year, $15 million interagency agreement, with the first cohort of 80 members to begin service in the summer of 2024. The AmeriCorps NCCC Forest Corps will deploy across America to conserve national forests and grasslands, mitigate risks of wildfires in high-risk regions, and support reforestation efforts and wildfire crisis response. AmeriCorps NCCC Forest Corps members will receive a compensation package equivalent to $15 an hour that includes lodging, transportation, clothing, a living allowance, health benefits, and more.

It appears that President Biden and his administration are throwing everything from legislation, executive orders, money, and man power through the Civilian Climate Corps at the pressing global issue of climate change. Time will tell if President Biden and his administrations lofty efforts will create or push for meaningful change on the issue of climate change.

“Republicans have denounced the program as a boondoggle that would create eco-vigilantes who, as one lawmaker recently warned, will “report who is watering their lawn, or whose fireplace is smoking.” A major obstacle is in the implementation of the Civilian Climate Corps and how to actually design the Civilian Climate Corps. Senior House Democrats have challenged that the plan, arguing billions of dollars should not be rushed out the door to an agency that would be saddled overnight with recruiting and training thousands of workers in clean energy and climate projects.

Engagement Resources:

Leds May Signal Brighter Times Ahead

Leds May Signal Brighter Times Ahead


Leds May Signal Brighter Times Ahead

Environmental Policy Brief #160 | By: Todd J. Broadman | September 27, 2023

Photo taken from: hilclare.com

__________________________________

The Energy Department has set a new rule or minimum standard for light bulbs: a minimum standard of 45 lumens per watt.  The target of the new rule are incandescent light bulbs; those bulbs only provide 15 watts per lumen and so to not meet the 45 lumens per watt standard.  Incandescent bulbs have had a long run; they trace their origin to an 1880 Thomas Edison patent. Congress granted the Energy Department authority to regulate the energy efficiency of consumer products in the Energy Policy and Conservation Act.

Advances in LED technology have largely driven the change. LED stands for “light emitting diode,” a semiconductor device that converts electricity directly into light. Even without the rule, U.S. household adoption of LED bulbs between 2015 and 2020 jumped more than tenfold — from 4 percent to 47 percent. Another driver is the global Net Zero Emissions by 2050standard policy. This rule change is one of the few energy segments on track to meet that goal. According to the International Energy Agency, “although some advanced markets have introduced new regulations mandating the exclusive sale of high-efficacy LED lamps, progress in this area must be sustained to ensure that all countries sell predominantly LED technology by 2025, and with increasing efficiency to 2030, to align with the Net Zero Emissions by 2050 Scenario.”

Whereas the average annual operating cost of a 60-watt incandescent bulb is $8.74, the operating cost of an equivalent 13-watt CFL is $1.89.  Expected utility bill savings may tally to nearly $3 billion per year. Only roughly 5 percent of the energy used by an incandescent bulb produces light; the remaining 95 percent or so is lost as heat. LED generate almost no heat and use up to 90 percent less energy than incandescent bulbs while lasting up to 25 times longer, according to the Energy Department.

The change to LEDs can be traced back to the George Bush administration of 2007 and the passage of the Energy Independence and Security Act which required bulbs in the 40 and 100 watt range be more energy efficient. The further restrictions placed on incandescent bulbs by the Obama administration were removed by Donald Trump who remarked with typical insensitivity for environmental concerns, “They took away our light bulb … I want an incandescent light. I want to look better, OK? I want to pay less money to look better. Does that make sense? You pay much less money, and you look much better.”

Analysis

The light bulb has been with us for almost two centuries. In 1835, the first constant electric light was demonstrated in Britain. Thomas Edison’s contribution was to improve the filament — first testing carbon, then platinum, before finally returning to a carbon filament. By October 1879, Edison’s team had produced a light bulb with a carbonized filament of uncoated cotton thread that could last for 14.5 hours. They continued to experiment with the filament until settling on one made from bamboo that gave Edison’s lamps a lifetime of up to 1,200 hours — this filament became the standard for the Edison bulb for the next 10 years.

There are those in Congress and others who would disregard these advances. The Republican National Committee said the move was emblematic of “Biden’s unhealthy obsession.” Another Republican Party official criticized that, “The Biden administration’s government overreach continues.” Other critics side with Trump’s sense of aesthetics, like writer Joseph Massey, “I often stay up late at my desk, and the warm glow of the lamp is like company as I read and write. Ugh. There are people in power who are dedicated to sucking all joy out of the world.” Paul McLellan has been in the bulb business as a retailer for over five decades and had a more pragmatic perspective: “The move was better for the environment but kind of bad for sales. We’ve been trying to get the word out there, and nobody is talking about it.” He claims his 15 call-center employees have become lighting therapists for distressed callers overnight.

LEDs emit a brighter, bluer light in shorter wavelengths. They also rapidly flicker on and off, which is referred to as temporal light modulation. For most people, this flickering is not consciously perceptible. But our brains notice it, which can result in headaches, eye strain, eye fatigue and decreased visual performance — without even realizing that these symptoms could be connected to the LED light near us. Some research suggests that exposure to the blue light found in LEDs is phototoxic and can induce damage in retinal cells, which can lead to vision problems, speed up aging of our eyes and lead to macular degeneration.

The bigger headache will and has come from the wasted energy, most of it in the form of carbon, in maintaining highly inefficient incandescent bulbs. With such a magnitude of convincing data on the LED, that it has taken the federal government over fifteen years to legislate its adoption, is yet another clear sign that the U.S. electorate lacks the willpower to make tangible lifestyle shifts towards a sustainable future.

Engagement Resources:

  • https://www.feslighting.com is a leading national Lighting as a Service (LaaS) provider on a mission to make it easy for businesses to make smart energy choices.
  • https://www.axios.com/ delivers news that gets you smarter, faster on what matters.
  • https://www.environmentalleader.com/ is a woman-owned B2B media company on a mission to empower business leaders and executives with the knowledge and insights they need to drive progress and make a positive impact on the world.
What Are Trump’s Indictments and How Much Prison Time Would He Serve?

What Are Trump’s Indictments and How Much Prison Time Would He Serve?


What Are Trump’s Indictments and How Much Prison Time Would He Serve?

Elections & Politics Policy Brief #98 | By: Arvind Salem | September 25, 2023
Photo taken from: ndtv.com

__________________________________

Former President Donald Trump has been faced with a number of criminal prosecutions, each accompanied by a whole host of indictments. All told, Donald Trump faces 91 felony counts across 4 cases, which will likely embroil him in legal battles for the near future. It also exposes to serving  581.5 years of prison time.This Brief will explain what each charge means (if it’s not self-explanatory) and what criminal action corresponds to the charge. As such, it assumes that the reader has a general knowledge of the facts of each of the four cases (if you need a refresher or want to learn the facts and issues for the first time see my briefs on the Georgia election interference case, the January 6th case, the classified documents case, and the hush money case).

In the most recent case brought against him by the state of Georgia Donald Trump faces 13 felony counts. Here’s what they all mean:

  1. Violation of the George RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) Act- The prosecution has characterized Trump and his network of allies working to overturn the 2020 election as a criminal organization engaged and conspiring to engage in criminal enterprise, which is why this statute, normally associated with organized crime, is used in this case.
  2. Solicitation of Violation of Oath By Public Officer (Thrice)- This refers to Trump’s attempts to persuade many officials to violate their oaths of office, including his infamous call with Georgia’s Secretary of State pressuring him to find more votes.
  3. Conspiracy to Commit Impersonating a Public Officer- This refers to Trump’s plans to assemble a state of fake electors to give Georgia’s electoral votes to Trump.
  4. Conspiracy to Commit Forgery in the First Degree- This is related to his fake elector scheme, in which he would’ve meant he would’ve had to forge a fake slate with the intent to defraud.
  5. Conspiracy to Commit False Statements and Writings (Twice)- This refers to Trump’s fake elector scheme and his claims of voter fraud, and statements and writings that he planned to make related to those efforts. For this charge, the prosecution will have to prove that Trump knew he was lying.
  6. False Statements and Writings (Twice)- The false statement charge applies to anyone who “knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact; makes a false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or makes or uses any false writing or document”  despite knowing the statement is false, which Trump allegedly did in the fake elector scheme and call with the Georgia Secretary of State.
  7. Conspiracy to Commit Filing False Documents and Filing False Documents ( Two separate charges, but related to the same event)- The prosecution argues that Trump filed a false document when he signed a court filing that alleged there was widespread voter fraud in Georgia, even though he allegedly knew there wasn’t. He was also conspiring to file false documents as part of the fake elector scheme.
  8. Conspiracy to Commit Forgery in the First Degree- This makes it a crime to conspire to write or alter writing, intending to defraud, which Trump allegedly did as part of the fake elector scheme.

The maximum possible prison sentence for this case is 76.5 years: the RICO charges carry a maximum sentence of 20 years, 3 years for each count of solicitation (9 years total), 2.5 years for conspiracy to impersonate a public official, 7.5 years for each count of conspiracy to commit forgery (15 years total), five years for false statements (10 years total), 2.5 years for conspiracy to commit false statements (5 years total), 10 years for filing false documents, and five years for conspiracy to file false documents.

The case immediately before that was a federal case against Trump brought by special prosecutor Jack Smith related to the same core issue: Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election, but this time concerning the events of January 6th. In this case, Trump faces 4 felony charges. Here’s the breakdown:

  1. Conspiracy to Defraud the United States- This refers to Trump spreading lies that the election was stolen, while allegedly knowing it wasn’t true, and for attempting to discount votes in an effort to win the 2020 election.
  2. Conspiracy to Obstruct an Official Proceeding- This refers to Trump’s alleged plan to obstruct the certification of electoral votes, an official proceeding.
  3. Obstruction of and Attempt to Obstruct an Official Proceeding- This refers to all the attempts that Trump and his allies made to obstruct the official certification of the votes in Congress from Election Day to January 6th.
  4. Conspiracy Against Rights- This refers to Trump and the co-conspirator’s attempts to disenfranchise people by threatening, oppressing, and intimidating them.

This case carries a maximum possible prison sentence of 55 years : 5 years for conspiracy to defraud, 20 years for each obstruction charge (40 total), and 10 for conspiracy against rights.

Before the January 6th indictment, Jack Smith indicted President Trump for alleged illegal mishandling of classified documents. Trump faces 40 felony counts based on the following actions:

  1. Violation of the Espionage Act: President Trump allegedly willfully retained classified documents that he was no longer entitled to have after the end of his presidency and refused to return them. The prosecution charged him with this violation for 32 documents, with each violation being one count.
  2. Conspiracy to Obstruct Justice: President Trump devised a conspiracy to ensure that the documents wouldn’t be available to a grand jury, which is an official proceeding, which means that devising this conspiracy constitutes a conspiracy to obstruct justice.
  3. Witholding a Document or Record: This refers to Trump attempting to persuade his lawyer to hide the documents from federal investigators and moving the documents so that his lawyer could not find the documents and present them to the grand jury.
  4. Corruptly Concealing a Document or Record: This refers to the same offense discussing in the previous charge, but the difference is that the previous charge penalizes the lie while this charge penalizes Trump for the fact that the documents could not presented to a grand jury (as a result of the duplicity that was discussed in the previous charge).
  5. Concealing a Document in a Federal Investigation: This refers to Trump repeatedly covering up his continued possession of the documents from the FBI.
  6. Scheme to Conceal: This refers to the scheme for the corresponding crime covered in the previous charge (scheming to conceal the document from the FBI).
  7. False Statements and Representations: By lying to his lawyers about where the documents were, Trump caused his lawyers to submit false statements to the grand jury while under oath, and the lawyers had no way of knowing that the statements were false.
  8. Altering, Destroying, Mutilating, or Concealing an Object: This charge was added on the superseding indictment relating to the new accusation that Trump ordered one of his employees to delete footage from Mar-a-Lago that was subpoenaed by a grand jury.

This case carries a theoretical maximum prison sentence of 450 years (if Trump was convicted of all counts and given the maximum sentence for each): the willful retention charges carry 10 years each (320 total and item 1 on the list), the obstruction charges carry 20 years (120 total, items 2-5 and 8 on the list) and false statement charges carry 5 years each (10 total, items 6 and 7 on the list).

Finally, there’s Trump’s first indictment related to hush money payments to Stormy Daniels during the 2016 election. He is charged on 34 felony counts in this case. All of them stem from the charge of falsifying business records in the first degree: referring to Trump falsely entering business records to cover up payments to Stormy Daniels. The prosecution identified 34 instances of this that they want to sentence Trump for, leading to 34 felony counts based on one charge. Each felony count carries a maximum sentence of 4 years, leading to a 136 Years Maximum sentence.

Engagement Resources:

Winred allows people to donate money to Republican candidates to support their campaign. Readers interested in supporting President Trump or other members of the Republican party may find that this is a useful way to convey their support and help the Republican cause.

The Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School is an organization that promotes reforms to the 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 indictment may wish to support the Brennan Center and help it advance its proposed reforms.

Act for America is an organization that seeks to educate and mobilize Americans against foreign and domestic threats, and advocates for bills to achieve these aims. Those who feel that this indictment constitutes a breakdown of justice may wish to support this organization.

ActBlue allows people to donate to a host of Democratic organizations, candidates, and causes. Readers are likely to find organizations that are supporting the Trump indictment on this site and may wish to donate money to further that cause.

 

Elections to Monitor in November 2023

Elections to Monitor in November 2023


Elections to Monitor in November 2023

Elections & Politics Policy Brief #97 | By: Ian Milden | September 25, 2023
Photo taken from: fivethirtyeight.com

__________________________________

Off-year elections generally don’t get much attention. When they do, it is usually one of the three governor’s races that I have previously written about (Kentucky, Mississippi, and Louisiana). In this brief, I will discuss a few more races that are on the ballot this November that deserve some degree of attention.

Virginia State Legislature

In Virginia, the state legislature is having its mid-term elections. Currently, Democrats have a narrow majority in the state senate and Republicans have a narrow majority in the state house. All state legislative seats will be on the ballot in November. Governor Glenn Youngkin (R-VA) and his allies are investing millions of dollars to help Republican candidates. If Republicans gain the majority in both chambers, they will be able to change state laws on a partisan basis. Virginia is also the closest state to a swing state holding significant regular elections this year, so voting trends in this year’s elections may provide some insight on next year’s elections.

New Jersey State Legislature

Much like Virginia, New Jersey is also holding mid-term elections for its state legislature this year. While Republicans are unlikely to take over the state legislature, it will be interesting to monitor southern New Jersey to see if Republicans continue making significant progress there. Republicans managed to unseat several Democrats including then-state senate President Stephen Sweeney in the previous election cycle. George Norcross, an insurance executive who had significant influence in southern New Jersey politics, said that he is stepping back from his involvement with state politics. Norcross was heavily involved in recruiting candidates and fundraising for them, so this is the first chance for New Jersey Democrats to evaluate their candidate recruitment and support strategies since Norcross withdrew from politics.

If Democrats perform poorly statewide again, that could be another sign of trouble for Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ), who is up for reelection in 2024. Menendez’s popularity with voters has been poor due to a corruption scandal which led to him being indicted in 2017, but the case ended in a mistrial.

Rhode Island Congressional Special Election

Congressman David Cicilline (D-RI) resigned on June 1st to take a job with a nonprofit in Rhode Island. The special election to fill his seat will be held on November 7th. Fifteen Democrats filed to run for the seat. Gabe Amo, a former policy staff member in the Obama and Biden Administrations, won the Democratic nomination for the seat. While Amo should win this race, the margin will be worth keeping an eye on since trends in special elections can indicate what voters might do in the next general election.

Pennsylvania State Supreme Court Special Election

This seat is open due to the death of Chief Justice Max Baer in October of 2022. Justices run in partisan elections for ten-year terms, though Pennsylvania has a mandatory retirement age of 75. In the May primary, Democrats nominated Daniel McCaffrey and Republicans nominated Carolyn Carluccio. McCaffrey is the former assistant district attorney in Philadelphia and has served as a judge in a court of common pleas. McCaffrey is currently a state judge on the superior court. Carluccio is a judge in Montgomery County. While this race will not determine the partisan balance of the court, this was a seat that the Democrats held. If Democrats lose this seat, they would only have a one-seat majority on the state supreme court.

Engagement Resources:

x
x
Support fearless journalism! Your contribution, big or small, dismantles corruption and sparks meaningful change. As an independent outlet, we rely on readers like you to champion the cause of transparent and accountable governance. Every donation fuels our mission for insightful policy reporting, a cornerstone for informed citizenship. Help safeguard democracy from tyrants—donate today. Your generosity fosters hope for a just and equitable society.

Pin It on Pinterest