JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
The History of the Israel-Hamas War Thus Far
Brief #101 – Foreign Policy Brief
by Abran C
Israel’s war on the strip has resulted in the deaths of over 13,000 Palestinian civilians, with thousands more missing and believed to be…
Streaming Platforms and Their Impact on Global Television Culture
Brief #152 – Social Justice Policy Brief
by Arvind Salem
This method of content delivery caters to the modern viewer’s preference for binge-watching, thereby creating a new norm in media consumption.
UAW Strike Ends, but at What Cost?
Brief #58 – Economic Policy Brief
by Arvind Salem
A week before the strike ended, an analysis found that the strike cost the economy $9.3 billion, meaning that by the time it ended its cost to the U.S. economy was likely well over $10 billion.
What did Sam Bankman Fried Do and What Does it Mean for Cryptocurrency?
Brief #57 – Economic Policy Brief
by Arvind Salem
Fried was found guilty on 7 counts of fraud, including wire fraud, securities fraud and money laundering, all of which he took from customers of FTX for his own personal gain.
Be on the Lookout: Politicians Never Stop Campaigning
Brief #110 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by Steve Piazza
During the most recent Republican Presidential Debate, candidates made a hard sale expressing their unconditional support of Israel in its conflict with Hamas.
The New Supreme Court Ethics Code Needs More To Be Effective
Brief #214 – Civil Rights Policy Brief
by Rodney A. Maggay
On November 13, 2023 the Supreme Court announced that for the first time in its history the Court’s justices would be bound by an ethical code.
Republican-based Anti-Abortion Groups are Losing State Battles Over Reproductive Rights
Policy Brief #168 – Health and Gender
by Geoffrey Small
Republicans are struggling to maintain a consistent message, as anti-abortion activists have experienced infighting on how to administer laws post-Roe v. Wade.
Examining Competitive House Races in the Midwest
Brief #109 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by Ian Milden
There are a handful of seats in this region that Democrats can target, but the Democratic Party will need to make significant efforts to recruit the right candidates and support their campaigns.
War in Gaza Intensifies Internet Misinformation Concerns
Brief #101 – Technology Policy Brief
by Mindy Spatt
The danger of false information spreading online has only intensified in the wake of the war in Gaza, and Twitter is one of the wort culprits.
Is Trump Barred From The 2024 Ballot By The Constitution’s Disqualification Clause?
Is Trump Barred From The 2024 Ballot By The Constitution’s Disqualification Clause?
Civil Rights Policy Brief #211 | By: Rodney A. Maggay | September 13, 2023
Photo taken from: cnn.com
__________________________________
Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides:
“No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”
On January 6, 2021, rioters stormed the U.S. Capitol building during the official certification of the electoral votes that was being presided by Vice – President Mike Pence. The certification would have declared Joe Biden the winner of the 2020 election over President Donald J. Trump. President Trump had previously rallied the crowd to march to the Capitol to try to persuade the Vice – President to reject some electoral slates from certain states in order to delay certification of Biden’s win. After the crowd marched to the Capitol and demonstrated outside, they became unruly and violently entered the Capitol building. The crowd smashed windows, broke down doors and forced their way through barriers forcing a temporary suspension of the certification proceedings and forcing Members of Congress and their staff to retreat for their own personal safety. Persons in the mob were heard chanting “Hang Mike Pence!” After a few tense hours, the Capitol building was cleared and Members of Congress were escorted back inside where the certification of electoral votes continued, ultimately ending with Joe Biden being officially declared the winner of the 2020 election.
Subsequently, hundreds of persons who were part of the mob that violently entered the Capitol to disrupt the certification proceedings were criminally prosecuted and handed varying sentences, including one person being sentenced to seventeen years in prison. Since leaving office, Donald Trump has been indicted four times although only one of those concerns the events of January 6, 2001. (The other indictments are about Trump’s business dealings, his handling of classified U.S. documents and Trump’s efforts to overturn the votes in Georgia about the 2020 election.) LEARN MORE
Policy Analysis: While Donald Trump is in serious legal jeopardy on numerous charges across numerous states, a legal scenario is being actively discussed that could bar Donald Trump from appearing on the ballot in a number of states as a 2024 presidential candidate. Could Donald Trump be barred based on the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment “Disqualification Clause?”
The text of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is clear although legal scholars are split in their opinion as to whether the clause can be applied to the former President.
One legal theory states that the clause does not apply to Mr. Trump because the clause was aimed at former Confederate soldiers and politicians. The clause was added in the aftermath of the Civil War to prevent former Confederates from holding office and possibly trying to subvert the United States again if they were to become officers or politicians of the government again. The legal theory goes that since the clause was intended only for those persons in the mid – nineteenth century, the clause does not apply to anyone else. However, this is a strict reading of the text that would render the clause obsolete in today’s modern world if it only applied to persons alive in the late 1800’s.
Today, many groups in a number of states are looking to clarify the application of the 14th Amendment’s Section 3 with lawsuits, petitions and other legal avenues. In New Hampshire, Secretary of State David Scanlan recently requested legal guidance from the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office about whether Trump can be allowed on the ballot. In Colorado, six Republicans and other voters, represented by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), filed a lawsuit looking to bar the Colorado Secretary of State from allowing Trump on the ballot in 2024. And in Florida, another lawsuit was brought to bar Trump from the 2024 ballot although that case was dismissed on procedural grounds. It is becoming clear that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is going to become a focal point about whether the former President is going to have a shot at winning in 2024.
But application of the clause to Trump is still up in the air and the courts are going to have to decide, even if it goes all the way to the Supreme Court. While it is not clear how the courts will decide, some clues have begun to emerge. In New Mexico, the disqualification clause was used to remove a county commissioner from office based on his presence at the January 6th riot. This has been the only successful removal of a person from office based on the Disqualification Clause since 1869 and illustrates that the clause can be used in modern times to prohibit a person from holding office after participating in an insurrection. Additionally, that court declared that the incident of January 6th was an insurrection. That is key because some right wing news sites have tried to change the narrative by calling January 6th something else, like a peaceful protest, when it clearly was not. With a court already declaring the events of that day an insurrection, the ruling provides legal support that President Trump caused an insurrection and makes it more difficult to evade the specific words contained in the Disqualification Clause.
However, some have pointed out that Trump has also not been charged with causing an insurrection or rebellion. His charges are only for conspiracy. If a court were to follow a strict interpretation of words, they could require a person first be charged or convicted of actual incitement of insurrection or rebellion before being barred under the Disqualification Clause. Being charged with conspiracy or rebellion are separate and distinct crimes and it is possible a court could find being charged for conspiracy, like Trump, does not meet the wording contained in the clause. Right now, this is all speculation and a court will have to weigh in and clarify how the clause applies and whether it applies to Trump or not. And in a number of states the race for legal clarification has already started and will make for an interesting side story, or maybe the main story, of the 2024 election season.
Engagement Resources:
- The Hill – good discussion from news site discussing a candidate’s eligibility under the Fourteenth Amendment.
- Politico – news site’s article on history of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Disqualification Clause.
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.
Medicare Negotiations on Drugs Save Money and Lives
Medicare Negotiations on Drugs Save Money and Lives
Health and Gender Policy Brief #163 | By: Geoffrey Small | September 11, 2023
Photo taken from: www.startribune.com
__________________________________
On August 29th, the Biden Administration announced a list of ten drugs selected for Medicare price negotiation. The Inflation Reduction Act, which was enacted last year, gives Medicare the authority to negotiate drug prices with pharmaceutical companies. The targeted drugs cost seniors a total of $3.4 billion in out-of-pocket costs during 2022, and this price negotiation will provide much needed relief to Americans who are struggling to afford their medications. The drugs that were selected are the highest in total spending for Medicare Part D recipients. They also address some of the most life-threatening diseases impacting U.S. citizens.
| Drug Name | Commonly Treated Conditions |
| Eliquis | Prevention and treatment of blood clots |
| Jardiance | Diabetes; Heart failure |
| Xarelto | Prevention and treatment of blood clots; Reduction of risk for patients with coronary or peripheral artery disease |
| Januvia | Diabetes |
| Farxiga | Diabetes; Heart failure; Chronic kidney disease |
| Entresto | Heart failure |
| Enbrel | Rheumatoid arthritis; Psoriasis; Psoriatic arthritis |
| Imbruvica | Blood cancers |
| Stelara | Psoriasis; Psoriatic arthritis; Crohn’s disease; Ulcerative colitis |
| Fiasp; Fiasp FlexTouch; [etc…] | Diabetes |
Policy Analysis
The JAMA Health Forum released an investigation, earlier this year, that details a hypothetical impact the Inflation Reduction Act would’ve had on Medicare drug prices, if the policy was enacted in 2018. A cross-sectional study using a policy simulation analysis between 2018 and 2022 revealed that recently mandated statutory ceiling prices would have reduced overall Medicare spending by 5%, or roughly $26.5 billion. The study noted that Medicare’s ability to negotiate drug prices has limitations. There are strict criteria that certain drugs must meet to be selected for negotiation. Also, drugs that have been reduced can become ineligible during the 2-year negotiation process it takes to go in effect. However, the reduced Medicare spending overall is still significant despite these issues.
Though cost reduction is the primary reason these drugs have been selected by Medicare for negotiation, the positive impact on healthcare for seniors is just as significant. The Whitehouse stated the targeted medications were vital treatments for diabetes, heart disease, and cancer. According to the CDC, two leading causes of death in 2022 were heart disease and cancer, and that rate has increased since 2021. Diabetes was also included in the top 10 underlying causes
of death.
A 2022 Health and Human Services report on “Prescription Drug Affordability among Medicare Beneficiaries” states that “more than 5 million [recipients] struggle to afford prescription medications.” Black and Latino adults over the age of 65 reported difficulties with affording their medications 1.5 to 2 times higher than white adults. It’s important to note that adults under 65 with qualifying disabilities or end-stage renal disease had significantly higher rates of affordability issues than adults over 65. The report also indicates that “Medicare beneficiaries with lower incomes and those under age 65 also had above-average rates of not taking needed medications due to cost.”
The Biden Administration has pursued an agenda to reduce medical costs for Medicare recipients since taking office. The Inflation Reduction Act is the cornerstone of the President’s efforts to deliver more affordable healthcare for Medicare recipients. The JAMA Network details the justification of these costs, based on scientific data, to inform U.S. citizens about the benefits of negotiating costs. Subscribing to their health forum can lead to better public awareness about the benefits of a more proactive Medicare system.
Engagement Resources:
Google Cloud’s AI Conference Draws Protestors
Google Cloud’s AI Conference Draws Protestors
Technology Policy Brief #97 | By: Mindy Spatt | September 7, 2023
Photo taken from: sfstandard.com
__________________________________
Although the lengthy agenda for Google Cloud’s AI conference didn’t include any workshops on Project Nimbus, it was at the top of the agenda for a few hundred protestors who converged in San Francisco to accuse Google of complicity with the Israeli occupation of Palestine. Project Nimbus, a 1.2 billion dollar contract won by Amazon and Google, is a project that will move Israel’s entire government computer system to the cloud. But that isn’t all it will do.
Policy Analysis
Workers first raised the alarm about Nimbus in an open letter in the Guardian newspaper in 2021, which was signed by “more than 90 workers at Google and more than 300 at Amazon” anonymously, out of fear of retaliation. They called for an end to the project, which they said would “allow for further surveillance of and unlawful data collection on Palestinians” and facilitate expansion of illegal settlements.
In July 2022 their fears were confirmed by a report in The Intercept that concluded “Google’s data analysis offerings could worsen the increasingly data-driven military occupation.” Documents uncovered by The Intercept showed that the plan for Nimbus “would give Israel capabilities for facial detection, automated image categorization, object tracking, and even sentiment analysis that claims to assess the emotional content of pictures, speech, and writing.”
It is easy to see why activists are alarmed. Israel already bombs the homes of “suspected terrorists” and arrests Palestinians without charging them with anything; the possibilities of the wider net that would be cast by these technologies, extending even to “emotional content,” could be devastating. And Palestinians aren’t the only ones at risk. Last year Haaretz reported that the Pegasus spyware first used for surveillance of Palestinians was being deployed to spy on Israelis including those protesting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The demonstrators were unavoidable on Howard Street outside of the Moscone Center where the conference was held. They locked arms across the wide street and dropped banners from a pedestrian bridge, heard from speakers including San Francisco Poet Laureate Tongo Eisen-Martin and chanted and cheered loudly. Many wore t-shirts proclaiming they were Google employees- and most of those who donned the T-shirts also wore masks. The fear of retaliation is understandable, as Google has been accused of retaliating against employee activists often past, for both union activity and other forms of political activism.
Ariel Koren, an organizer of the protest and former Google employee told U.S. Resist News “In spite of the culture of retaliation that we’ve seen countless workers subjected to, you see Google workers out here today putting their jobs on the line. Workers have been organizing for the past two years to send a clear message that we refuse to allow our labor to be used to fuel apartheid violence against Palestinian people.” Koren said Nimbus is a culmination of Google’s deep seated history of complicity with the Israeli government and that Google was sweeping worker’s concerns under the rug.
I stood with a group of protestors handing leaflets out at the conference exit. Some conference-goers looked bemused, many looked away and only a small number accepted the proffered information.
Judy Graboyes, another protestor, acknowledged that the protest was unlikely to have an impact on Google in the near term, but that it was an important step toward building a movement to stop the use of tech for surveillance of the general population or in the service of an apartheid regime. “Everything starts slowly, one person at a time,” she said. “But you have to do something. If you don’t speak out against it, you are complicit with it.”
Engagement Resources:
- Documents Reveal Advanced Ai Tools Google Is Selling To Israel, Sam Biddle, July 24, 2022, https://theintercept.com/2022/07/24/google-israel-artificial-intelligence-project-nimbus/
- We are Google and Amazon workers. We condemn Project Nimbus Anonymous Google and Amazon workers, Oct. 12, 2021, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct/12/google-amazon-workers-condemn-project-nimbus-israeli-military-contract
- Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory illegal: UN rights commission, 20 October 2022, https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/10/1129722
- No Tech For Apartheid, https://www.notechforapartheid.com
Examining Competitive US House Races in California
Examining Competitive US House Races in California
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #93 | By: Ian Milden | September 6, 2023
Photo taken from: latimes.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 California, which has enough competitive races to affect the control of the House majority.
Analysis
Republicans shocked many pundits by only winning a four-seat majority in the House of Representatives during the midterm elections. While Democrats performed well nationally in 2022, there were several pickup opportunities for U.S. House seats that were missed during the 2022 campaign in California. If Democrats can successfully flip a few of these seats, then they have a good chance to re-take the House majority in 2024.
The seat that presents Democrats with the best pickup opportunity is held by John Duarte (R-CA) in the 13th district in the Central Valley. It was an open seat created during the redistricting process. Duarte is a moderate who won his seat in 2022 by less than 1,000 votes. Given that this was one of the closest races in the country last year, Democrats will likely put a lot of resources into flipping this district.
David Valadao in California’s 22nd District is also a vulnerable incumbent. His district is also in the Central Valley and south of Duarte’s. Valadao was initially elected in 2012, but he lost his seat in 2018 to TJ Cox. Valadao defeated Cox in 2020 after Cox became embroiled in a fraud scandal. Cox has since been indicted by federal prosecutors. State Representative Rudy Salas (D-CA) ran against Valadao in 2022, and Salas lost by about 3,000 votes.
Mike Garcia (R-CA) represents California’s 27th district in southern California. Garcia won his seat in a special election, which was held when Katie Hill (D-CA) resigned from Congress. Garcia won re-election in 2022 against the same challenger. Democrats within the district thought that Garcia could be defeated, but they needed more financial resources from outside groups since this is an expensive district to campaign in.
Ken Calvert (R-CA) currently represents the 41st district, which should be a competitive seat on paper, but Calvert has been reelected every year since 1992. Calvert won in 2022 by about 11,000 votes. Calvert has had some close races, so this race could be competitive if Democrats find the right candidate and put in substantial resources.
Young Kim (R-CA) and Michelle Steel (R-CA) represent two districts (the 40th and 45th districts respectively) that are part of the competitive Orange County area. Democrats won slightly different versions of these seats in 2018 but then lost them to Congresswoman Kim and Congresswoman Steel in 2020. The 47th district, which is currently represented by Katie Porter (D-CA), is another Orange County district that will be competitive this year, especially since Porter is vacating the seat to run for the U.S. Senate. Defending the open seat will likely be the greater priority for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee given that the 47th district is easier for Democrats to retain than trying to retake the 40th and 45th districts.
While it is unlikely for Democrats to win all of the competitive seats I mentioned in this brief, if they can flip two or three seats in California and hold the open seat in the 47th district, then Democrats stand a very good chance of retaking the House majority if things go well for the party in other states.
Engagement Resources
Donald Trump and Accountability
Donald Trump and Accountability
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #92 | By: Abigail Hunt | September 5, 2023
Photo taken from: nsjonline.com
__________________________________
Donald Trump is currently the leading candidate for the Republican party Presidential nomination – this man who openly bragged, on tape, about sexually assaulting strangers is somehow the person that many rural and misinformed Americans believe is their savior. Trump, who faces 91 criminal counts against him in New York, Georgia, and on the federal level. Trump’s indictments are mounting like the unpaid debts he accumulates. Indicted first in New York in spring 2023, Trump was hit with 34 counts of falsifying business records regarding his involvement in a $130,000 payment – of alleged hush money – to Stormy Daniels, an adult film actress. On the federal level, prosecutors indicted Trump in June for 40 charges of “willful retention of national defense information” regarding classified documents he took from the White House and stored in his shower in Mar-A-Lago, among other places.
On August 24th, Trump’s booking in Fulton County, Georgia where he faces 13 charges including fraud and racketeering was the first one of his his recent arrests to produce a mugshot. And what a mugshot. Trump leers into the camera like a movie villain. He and 18 other defendants face charges of attempting to manipulate the 2020 presidential election results in Georgia. Should a vocal and proud traitor to the federal government be allowed to run for the office of the President? Trump thinks so, but others are not so sure.
In late August, two Constitutional scholars, a retired federal U.S. Court of appeals judge and a nationally recognized professor of constitutional law from Harvard, argued in an article in The Atlantic that Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, includes language that precludes Donald J. Trump from ever being President again.
Section 3 states: “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies there of. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”
One Florida lawyer agreed so strongly with the Constitutional argument that he filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court. Lawrence Caplan of Ft. Lauderdale, FL put forth the argument that Trump was ineligible to run again for President due to his part in the January 6, 2021 insurrection in the Capitol. Caplan requested the court bar Trump from running for President and from taking part in the 2024 Florida Republican primary.
Despite the article’s persuasive arguments and his own track record of abusive, illegal, and treasonous behavior, Trump persists in being successful among conservatives. Even when his own former cabinet members have turned on him, many of Trump’s supporters remain steadfast. After his mugshot was released, Trump himself shared it on “X” (formerly known as Twitter) with the title, “Mug Shot – August 24, 2023” and the caption, “ELECTION INTERFERENCE! NEVER SURRENDER! DONALDJTRUMP.COM.” If there is one thing you can say about Trump, it is that he never fails to make headlines. But how long can he avoid accountability for his actions? The coming year will tell us a lot.
The Increased Clout of Youth Climate Activists: The Case of Montana
The Increased Clout of Youth Climate Activists: The Case of Montana
Environmental Policy Brief #159 | By: Inijah Quadri | September 5, 2023
Photo taken from: thenation.com
__________________________________
In a world demanding urgent action on climate change, youth activists are going beyond marching with placards and are wielding constitutions as their weapons of choice. A recent landmark case in Montana involved a group of young environmental activists, supported by the organization ‘Our Children’s Trust,’ challenging state policies on constitutional grounds, asserting their right to a “clean and healthful environment.”
This strategy highlights the delicate dance between the drive for development and the pressing need for environmental conservation. The Montana lawsuit might not just be a one-off event—it could herald the dawn of “green amendments” across the legal landscape.
Analysis
The youth activists, ranging from ages 5 to 22, and represented by ‘Our Children’s Trust,’ argued that the government’s insufficient action on climate change violated their constitutional rights to a clean and healthful environment. They contended that the state’s policy of evaluating fossil fuel permits—without considering greenhouse gas emissions—was unconstitutional. This approach not only risked their futures but also threatened the integrity of Montana’s cherished ecosystems.
District Court Judge Kathy Seeley ruled in favor of the activists, marking the first time a U.S. court ruled against a government for violating constitutional rights based on climate change. However, the immediate impacts of the ruling are limited as it is up to the Montana Legislature to determine how to bring the state’s policies into compliance.
The state, represented by Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen, decried the ruling as “absurd” and plans to appeal. Meanwhile, the youth group and ‘Our Children’s Trust’ hope that lawmakers will respect the state’s constitution and abide by the court’s decision, setting a precedent for similar cases worldwide.
While it is currently unclear if there are any other groups directly supporting the case, the outcome provides significant emotional support for various organizations and activists worldwide seeking to establish a public trust right, human right, or federal constitutional right to a healthy environment.
Broader Implications and Movement
The legal foray in Montana is interconnected with a larger, global youth-driven environmental thrust. There are stories of similar valiant efforts, from the courtrooms of the Netherlands to the streets of New Delhi to the EU. These shared narratives emphasize that we’re witnessing not just isolated events but a cohesive, worldwide youth-led revolution. The Montana case, with its intertwining of legal and environmental narratives, might just be a precursor to more such climate battles.
Conclusion
Youth-led legal actions highlight the delicate balance between developmental needs and environmental conservation. In other words, Children’s Trust argues that Montana’s government was supporting the state’s economic development without considering the impact of that development on the environment and people’s health. While the immediate impact of the Montana ruling remains to be seen, it sets an important legal precedent.
With the battle far from over, and as more states and countries contribute to the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, it is clear that these youth-led legal actions have brought the balance between developmental needs and environmental conservation into the spotlight. Whether through the courts or the streets, more young voices are expected to reshape the discourse on climate change.
Are we on the cusp of a new era of environmental litigation?
Further Engagement Resources
- Sunrise Movement (https://www.sunrisemovement.org/): A youth-led movement advocating for political action on climate change.
- Environmental Law Institute (https://www.eli.org/): Offers resources and research on environmental law, including youth-driven legal actions.
- Our Children’s Trust (https://www.ourchildrenstrust.org/): A legal team advocating for the rights of young individuals in the context of environmental challenges.
Is Donald Trump a Mob Boss? How Georgia is Using an Organized Crime Law to Prosecute Him
Is Donald Trump a Mob Boss? How Georgia is Using an Organized Crime Law to Prosecute Him
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #91 | By: Arvind Salem | August 30, 2023
Photo taken from: theweek.com
__________________________________
President Trump has been indicted once again for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election: this time in Georgia, which means even if he becomes President he can’t pardon away the punishment. The case focuses on his role allegedly spearheading a criminal enterprise and includes 18 other defendants including Rudy Guliani, one of Trump’s lawyers during his effort to overturn the election, and Mark Meadows, Trump’s chief of staff at the time of the election.
The indictment details a sprawling conspiracy to overturn the election and includes 41 counts: 22 counts related to forgery or false documents/statements, 8 counts are related to impersonating or soliciting public officials, 3 counts are related to influencing witnesses, 3 counts are related to election fraud/defrauding the state, 1 count is related to racketeering, and 1 count is related to perjury. These counts roughly map to five main areas of illegality: deliberately disseminating false statements about the election to manipulate Georgia’s legislature, efforts to intimidate state officials (including Trump’s infamous phone call to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger pressuring him to “find more votes”), breach of voting data, abusing and harassing state election workers, and attempting to send alternate electors to Congress to give Georgia’s electoral votes to President Trump.
Policy Analysis
Since it is so early in the case, many of the legal arguments have not yet been explored. One point of contention is the prosecution’s use of charges under the state’s RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) Act, which are generally reserved for mobs and other forms of organized crime. Using RICO allows the prosecution to use actions outside of Georgia to make their case. For example, the indictment cites a meeting Trump had with Michigan legislators where he made false statements of election fraud as one of the events in his conspiracy. They also allow the prosecution to charge a host of people under the same conspiracy.
There are two main challenges related to Trump’s prosecution under this case.. First, the prosecution needs to prove that Trump acted with criminal intent, which means that they will have to prove that Trump was pushing these claims, even though he knew they weren’t true. This difficulty isn’t specific to this case: it also applies to the federal case against Trump for the same effort. The second difficulty is proving coordination. All of the defendants must have acted for a common goal for RICO to apply and they will likely argue that they were disparate actors each pursuing their individual objectives that just happened to align sometimes due to their similar political goals.
Another legal challenge associated with this case is Trump’s motion to move the trial to federal court. Courts have developed defendant friendly rules that generally allow federal officials to have their case heard in federal court. If successful, this could delay the trial (which is nearly always a good thing for Trump because it allows him to focus on campaigning) and give Trump a more friendly jury pool. Currently the jury pool is made up exclusively of people from Atlanta, a very Democratic city with jurors who are likely to be against Trump politically, but if the trial is moved to federal court, the jury pool would also consist of people in the areas surrounding Atlanta, which would likely be slightly more pro-Trump than a jury drawn of people just in Atlanta.
A final complication occurs from the relative timings of this case and Jack Smith’s federal case against Trump. Jack Smith’s case will likely go to trial earlier because it is more focused, while the Georgia case includes many defendants and attempts to prove a web of criminal conspiracy. Since they cover many of the same actions and issues, Trump’s defense team will have to be especially mindful of their strategy to ensure that anything they do in the first case does not provide ammunition for the Georgia prosecution.
Engagement Resources
- Winred
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. - Brennan Center
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
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
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.
Navigating Digital Ethics: Autonomy, Consent, and Algorithmic Justice in the Modern Age
Navigating Digital Ethics: Autonomy, Consent, and Algorithmic Justice in the Modern Age
Technology Policy Brief #96 | By: Inijah Quadri | August 30, 2023
Photo taken from: cxotoday.com
__________________________________
In a world increasingly intertwined with digital technologies, there lies a pertinent responsibility to navigate the complex landscape of digital ethics. The exponential growth of artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, and big data has ignited pressing questions concerning the balance of power between machines and humans, the true essence of ‘informed consent’, and the hidden biases within algorithms that dictate our daily lives. Addressing these concerns is not just a technological challenge but a deeply ethical one, with implications for human rights, democracy, and the very fabric of our society.
Analysis
Technological Autonomy vs. Human Control:
The emergent capabilities of AI systems have blurred the boundaries between machine autonomy and human control. Systems that once required human input are now capable of independent decision-making, often in complex scenarios. This transition has led to profound ethical dilemmas. For instance, in healthcare, AI diagnostic tools might sometimes make recommendations that diverge from human expertise. While these tools can enhance precision and speed, relying solely on them without human oversight could result in misdiagnoses or the oversight of nuanced human symptoms. The ethical crux lies in determining where and when to draw the line, ensuring machines aid, not override, human judgment.
The Illusion of Informed Consent:
The modern digital user is incessantly bombarded with terms and conditions, privacy policies, and consent forms. The sheer volume and complexity of these documents often force users into passive acceptance, raising doubts about the genuineness of ‘informed’ consent. Are users truly aware of the extent of the data they’re sharing, its potential uses, or the long-term implications of these agreements? Ethical navigation in this realm mandates a radical redesign of user agreements: they must be concise, transparent, and comprehensible, ensuring users make truly informed decisions.
Unmasking Algorithmic Bias:
While algorithms are often perceived as neutral entities, they are, in fact, reflections of their creators and the data they are trained on. Biased data can lead to skewed algorithms, which in turn can perpetuate and even exacerbate existing societal inequalities. For instance, an AI system trained predominantly on one racial group’s data might misidentify members of another group, leading to potential discrimination. The challenge is not just to refine these algorithms but to approach their creation with a holistic, inclusive perspective, ensuring they are equitable and just.
To approach these challenges effectively, a multifaceted strategy is essential. This includes fostering interdisciplinary collaboration among technologists, ethicists, sociologists, and policymakers; creating regulatory frameworks that prioritize human rights and ethical considerations; and, most importantly, nurturing a societal ethos that places ethics at the forefront of technological advancements.
Engagement Resources
- Algorithm Watch (https://algorithmwatch.org/ ): This non-profit initiative stands out for its dedication to scrutinizing and shedding light on algorithmic decision-making processes. Their work emphasizes transparency and accountability, aiming to make opaque algorithms understandable for the general public.
- Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency in Machine Learning (FAT/ML) (https://www.fatml.org/): FAT/ML is a pioneering platform in the realm of machine learning. It endeavors to create systems that are not just technically proficient but also uphold the pillars of fairness, accountability, and transparency.
- Future of Life Institute (https://futureoflife.org/): A visionary organization, it seeks to align the trajectory of powerful technologies like AI with humanity’s best interests. It delves into the ethical, societal, and practical challenges, promoting research and dialogue that benefits all of society.
The Week That Was: Global News In Review
The Week That Was: Global News in Review
Foreign Policy Brief #89 | By: Abran C | August 29, 2023
Photo taken from: cbc.ca
__________________________________
Building BRICS
Last week, BRICS, a bloc of top emerging economies, which include Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, took a major step in expanding their influence and global reach with the announcement that six more nations have been welcomed as new members. Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the UAE have been invited to join the grouping of top emerging economies in January 2024. Collectively the bloc makes up around 32% of global GDP, and that is before the expansion took place. The bloc was formed in 2009 and previously said it was seeking to grow a stronger coalition of developing nations who can better represent the interests of the Global South on the world’s stage. Before the start of its annual summit in South Africa this week, more than 40 countries had expressed interest in joining BRICS, and 23 formally applied to join. Yet of the six that were invited to join it is hard to find commonalities with those selected, the best and most likely explanation is that they are geostrategic choices for the bloc. The block has expressed its intention to challenge Western hegemony and its expansion appears in-line with its global ambitions.
Guatemala’s Presidential Election
Guatemalan’s took to the polls on Sunday in an unexpected election in which progressive Semilla party candidate, Bernardo Arevalo, was elected as the next President of the most populous Central American nation. Arevalo rapidly gained support appealing to widespread public discontent with crime and corruption, promising to tackle malnutrition, and bring growth to a country that has one of the highest levels of inequality in the region. The Electoral Observation Mission of Guatemala observed the elections over the weekend and reported no irregularities. Yet on Monday, after fears of possible election tampering, the country’s electoral registry suspended the Semilla party to which Arevalo belongs. Though it appears he will be able to take office as president on Jan. 14,2024, it is not clear whether his Semilla party lawmakers would be able to take their seats in the country’s Congress. The Organization of American States’ human rights commission asked that the current Guatemalan government provide protection for Arévalo after reports emerged of a possible plot to kill him and UN Secretary-General António Guterres expressed concern about the attempts to undermine the results of Guatemala’s presidential election.
Japan releases Fukushima power plant water into the Pacific Ocean
Japan has started releasing treated radioactive water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant into the Pacific Ocean. The plant was destroyed in 2011 after an earthquake and massive tsunami struck the Island nation, and water used to cool the plants reactors from a meltdown has been accumulating ever since. Currently, some 350 million gallons are being stored in more than 1,000 tanks according to Japanese authorities. A review by the UN’s nuclear watchdog says the discharge will have no great radiological impact to people and the environment, yet still surrounding nations and the Japanese public remain concerned. The government has been working on a complex filtration system that removes most of the radioactive isotopes from the water. Known as the Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS), it can remove several different radioactive contaminants from the water. but there’s a radioactive isotope that they cannot filter out: tritium. Tritium is an isotope of hydrogen, and hydrogen is part of the water itself (H20). So it is impossible to create a filter that could remove the tritium. Still the International Atomic Energy Agency has peer reviewed this plan and believes it is consistent with international safety standards.
Extreme Heat Ravages Arizona
Extreme Heat Ravages Arizona
Environmental Policy Brief #158 | By: Carlos Avalos | August 29, 2023
Photo taken from: nbcnews.com
__________________________________
If you were wondering if summer 2023 felt a bit warmer than usual, you would be correct. Specifically, NASA reported July 2023 as Hottest Month on Record Ever Since 1880. The world is on track to experience record-setting high temperatures for the next five years because of heat-trapping pollution being released into the atmosphere. Many places in the U.S have experienced record-breaking heat. There was a major heatwave this summer where people living in the Western and Southwestern United States experienced extreme heat and record-breaking temperatures. During certain times in July 2023 “about one-third of Americans were under excessive heat warnings, watches or advisories over the weekend, according to the National Weather Service, after a persistent heat dome hovering over Texas expanded to California, Nevada and Arizona.”
This extreme heat hitting certain parts of the U.S is large in part due to climate change and global warming. Climate change can be defined as “a change in global or regional climate patterns attributed largely to the increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide produced by the use of fossil fuels.”
Global warming is when “a gradual increase in the overall temperature of the earth’s atmosphere generally attributed to the greenhouse effect caused by increased levels of carbon dioxide, chlorofluorocarbons, and other pollutants.”
Analysis
In Arizona, the temperature has been oppressive during the summer months. Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport in downtown Phoenix clocked in for 30 plus consecutive days of temperatures above 110 degrees in July. This beat the old record set almost sixty years ago in June of 1974 where a streak of 18 days was set. In July Phoenix also set a record for highest monthly average temperature for any U.S city at 102.7 degrees Fahrenheit.
So far this year 25 people have died due to the extreme heat in Maricopa County. Around 249 heat related deaths are currently under investigation. Last year 425 people dies in Maricopas County due to the heat.
The heat is so extreme that Arizona Hospitals are seeing severe degree burns just by people being exposed to the concrete by falling on it. If part of a person’s body is left on the pavement for minutes the part of the skin exposed can be completely damaged. Heat stroke and heat exhaustion are filling up the emergency rooms with an abnormal number of Hospitals being filled to the brink. In Arizona, “Hospitals have not been this busy with overflow since a few peaks in the Covid pandemic.”
The heat in Arizona is also taking its toll on agriculture, flowers, and the Saguaro Cactus. Extreme heat is causing harm to Honeybees, a species vital to our ecosystem, especially food production; dire heat is killing honey bees and melting their homes. Wheat Kernels are shrinking because of the heat causing their protein levels to rise which in turn CAUSES crop yields to be half of what farmer usually produce; canola oil and safflower seeds are being damaged by the heat making many fruits and vegetables too soft to harvest. Some steps to combat these issues are harvesting at night, spraying crops with water vapor, or using netting on their crops.
In Arizona, probably the biggest tell all that there is something extremely wrong, is the story of what’s happening to the the Saguaro Cactus.
The severe heat in Arizona is causing the Saguaro cactus to lose limbs or to completely fall over on itself. Extreme heat and lack of monsoon rain in Arizona are testing the preconceived notion that “plants could adapt to high temperatures and sustain themselves in a drought.”
The federal government is hearing the SOS sent out by many states and is responding. “A bipartisan infrastructure law sets aside $20 billion to upgrade electrical grids to be able to withstand stronger storms and heatwaves; President Biden also said he asked Acting Labor Secretary Julie Su to issue a “Heat Hazard Alert,” which gives workers federal heat-related protections.”
Engagement Resources
- Az Heat Resilience workgroup, part of Arizona State Universities
- Global Institute of Sustainability and Innovation is doing all they can to help Arizonian’s during the extreme heat. The Office of Heat Response and Mitigation in the city of Phoenix is also doing everything it can to help people stay cool.