JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
Congress to Blame for the Child Poverty Rate
Policy Brief #165 – Health and Gender
by Geoffrey Small
With Republicans maintaining a House majority, there was no hope for a vote in favor of continuing the increased tax credit.
Online Dating Evolution: Technology’s Influence on Modern Relationships
Brief #148 – Social Justice Policy Brief
by Inijah Quadri
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 Civilian Climate Corps Unveiled to Combat Climate Change
Brief #161 – Environmental Policy Brief
by Carlos Avalos
The aim of the Civilian Climate Corps, as stated in the Executive Order, is to… maximize the creation of accessible training opportunities and good jobs.
Leds May Signal Brighter Times Ahead
Brief #160 – Environmental Policy Brief
by Todd J. Broadman
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.
What Are Trump’s Indictments and How Much Prison Time Would He Serve?
Brief #98 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by Arvind Salem
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…
Elections to Monitor in November 2023
Brief #97 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by Ian Milden
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.
Not-Prosecuting Children as Adults is a Favorite Tool of Those Seeking to Prosecute Prosecutors
Brief #96 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by Mindy Spatt
She was adamant on not charging juveniles as adults. “Charge juveniles as adults?” she commented, “That is not where this community is.”
Can Congress Keep It Together?
Brief #95 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by William Bourque
Speaker Kevin McCarthy is on the brink of losing the speakership. Reports from the GOP conference have indicated a fractured party with no end in sight.
The Week That Was: Global News In Review
Brief #91 – Foreign Policy Brief
by Abran C
Last week in Havana Cuba, The Group of 77 (G77) met to discuss the most pressing issues facing developing nations around the world.
The Ukraine Crisis: Situation Update #24
The Ukraine Crisis: Situation Update # 24
Foreign Policy Brief #82 | By: Abran C | June 30, 2023
Photo taken from: pbs.org
__________________________________
Wagner’s Mutiny
On June 24, 2023 the Wagner group led by hot dog sales-man turned warlord Yevgeny Prigozhin, led an armed revolt against the Russian military. The world watched in shock as an armed rebellion made its way from Ukraine towards Moscow. Russian President Vladimir Putin called the action treasonous and vowed punishment for those responsible. The Wagner group is a large, 25,000 member strong, mercenary group created by Prigozhin. It was first identified in 2014, when it started backing pro-Russian separatist forces in eastern Ukraine. Wagner forces have since been operating in multiple African and the Middle Eastern countries as a proxy for the Russian military. Although mercenary forces are illegal in Russia, Wagner officially registered as a company in 2022. Most recently the group was heavily involved in the capture of the city of Bakhmut, in eastern Ukraine.
Wagner’s leader, Yevgeny Prigozhin, has been at odds with Russian military leadership for some time now, threatening to pull Wagner troops out of Ukraine if the military did not take actions suggested by him. Prigozhin has repeatedly accused defense minister Sergei Shoigu and the head of armed forces in Ukraine, Valery Gerasimov, of incompetence. On 23 June, Prigozhin accused top Russian defense officials of bombing Wagner troops in Ukraine. A day later, his troops seized control of the southern Russian city of Rostov-on-Don and began their march towards Moscow. The stated aim of their mutiny was removal of the military leadership and not a coup. However, the convoy stopped the advance after negotiations with the Kremlin were mediated by Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko. Ptigozhin agreed to go into exile in Belarus, along with Wagner troops which remain loyal to him.
It’s unclear what Putin’s next steps will be. The Russian leader is not one known to allow criticism or disloyalty in his ranks, much less an armed mutiny against his own military. Russia’s global image and Putin’s grip on power have certainly dwindled with this most recent event. It is also not certain what Prigozhin will do in the future, as so often throughout history, powerful opposition leaders to authoritarian leaders who are exiled abroad and told to stay out of politics rarely remain so.
Nuclear Weapons in Belarus
Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko recently announced that his country has started taking delivery of Russian tactical nuclear weapons. The small Eastern European state of Belarus has had no nuclear weapons on its territory since the early 1990s. Shortly after gaining its independence following the fall of the Soviet Union, it agreed to transfer all weapons of mass destruction to Russia. President Vladimir Putin announced in March that he had agreed to deploy tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus, pointing to the US deployment of similar weapons in a host of European countries over many decades. On Friday Putin said that Russia, “will retain control of the tactical nuclear weapons,and would start deploying them in Belarus after special storage facilities to house them were made ready”.
Ukraine Counter Offensive
Earlier this month, President Zelensky confirmed Ukraine’s long-awaited counter-offensive to recapture areas occupied by Russia had begun. Last week, he acknowledged that the battlefield progress has been slower than desired. Ukrainian forces have, however, reportedly made gains in the previously Russian occupied southern Kherson region, crossing the Dnipro river and establishing a foothold there. With the Kremlin occupied with the fallout of last week’s mutiny, it may be difficult for them to fight both internal and external battles, and provide a window for Ukraine to retake its territory from the invading army.
“March for Justice” in Russia Broke Illusion of Putin’s Power
“March for Justice” in Russia Broke Illusion of Putin’s Power
Foreign Policy Brief #81 | By: Yelena Korshunov | June 30, 2023
Photo taken from: rferl.org
__________________________________
The “March for Justice”, announced by the head of Wagner mercenary forces, Yevgeny Prigozhin, on the evening of June 23rd, ended as suddenly as it began. On the morning of June 24th, mercenaries captured the Russian city of Rostov-on-Don, with a population of over one-million, located not far from the Ukrainian border. While some residents of the city gathered in the center to take pictures with soldiers in uniform and military equipment, others asked them to leave. From Rostov, the Wagner mercenaries headed to Moscow – through the Voronezh and Lipetsk Russian regions. During the “march” of the Wagnerites, an oil depot caught fire near the city of Voronezh, and the huge flame was ultimately extinguished after 12 hours. The cause of the fire is still uncertain, although it was reported that a military helicopter flew over the depot shortly before.
Then, what was the purpose of the sudden rebellion? (Perhaps not so unexpected for the US officials, which, according to mass media sources, were warned by the intelligence about the impending uprising.) There is a lot of perplexity around it. “What the heck just happened in Russia?” states a caption in the Morning Brew news review. Prigozhin said that one of the reasons for the armed rebellion are the numerous defeats of the Russian army in Ukraine, including the battles for the Zaporozhye region.
Since the beginning of the Ukrainian counteroffensive a few weeks ago , Ukrainian troops have advanced about three kilometers. However, the situation for the Russian military forces was not yet critical since their defense was strongly strengthened in this particular area in tense anticipation of the counteroffensive
Prigozhin demanded that Minister of Defense Sergei Shoigu and Chief of the General Staff and First Deputy Minister of Defence Valery Gerasimov be turned over to mercenaries. Soon after, a criminal case under the Russian Article on Armed Rebellion was opened against Prigozhin. However, when Wagner mercenaries were 200 kilometers from Moscow, Prigozhin reported that they were “going in the opposite direction to the field camps according to the plan [because] now has come the moment when blood can be spilled.” This was not only vague, but also a false and meaningless statement: at least 13 (up to 18, according to various sources) Russian pilots had already been killed by mercenaries during the day of the mutiny. In fact, Prigozhin made that statement after the press service of Belarus president Alexander Lukashenko announced the end of the negotiations with him, which were held in agreement with Russia’s president Vladimir Putin. The press secretary of the Russian president, Dmitry Peskov, said that the criminal case against Prigozhin would be dropped and he would “leave” to Belarus (for a foggy purpose). The mercenaries who participated in the rebellion would not be prosecuted. Moreover, they will be able to sign military contracts with the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation.
The day before, Prigozhin accused the leadership of Russia’s Ministry of Defense of shelling the mercenaries. He declared that the Wagner mercenaries dealt with the “brutes” who “destroy Russian soldiers.” In a response to the rebellion and Prigozhin’s speech, Putin appeared on TV accusing Prigozhin (though without mentioning his last name) of “betrayal” and “stabbing in the back”. Prigozhin replied that “the president made a deep mistake”. He said that “no one is going to repent at the request of the president, the FSB, or anyone else.” By that time, the Wagnerites already controlled Rostov-on-Don and during the next hours unimpededly advanced towards Moscow.
Policy analysis
So far, what are the outcomes of the “March for Justice ”, initiated by the criminal from Putin’s close circle nicknamed “Putin’s chef”, and that arose and burst as fast as a soap bubble within 36 hours? Prigozhin’s rebellion lasted less than a day, but this story won’t pass without consequences for the system of power diligently built up by Russia’s leader. From this point, it will be much more difficult for Putin to assemble and hold his vertical of power since the Russian elite’s demands to reorganize the system will only increase. For Putin what is truly important is his ability to reliably hold the levers of control in his hands. The de facto amnesty for Prigozhin that has been announced right after Putin labeled him a “traitor” indicates that there are serious doubts about the president’s aptitude of holding these levers.
The rebellion demonstrated the vulnerability of Putin’s system of power at its very core. Prigozhin’s acts clearly proved that in Russia it is possible to easily capture a metropolis without a single shot, and then move towards Moscow without meeting any serious resistance. This means that Russian military authorities thrown into the war with Ukraine may not be willing to risk their lives for the sake of commands from Moscow. A draw, which ended the confrontation, does not change the whole picture that demonstrated to the entire world Putin’s inability to keep under control even his most trusted and formerly devoted courtiers.
The Republican Presidential Candidates Positions on Education and Immigration
The Republican Presidential Candidates’ Positions on Education and Immigration
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #83 | By: Abigail Hunt | June 27, 2023
Photo taken from: wired.com
__________________________________
Summary
The ever-expanding field of 2024 Presidential candidates for the GOP nomination includes several current or former politicians, including governors from Arkansas, South Carolina, Florida, New Jersey, and North Dakota, an ex-President, an ex-Vice President, an entrepreneur of biotech and health care, a Midwestern businessperson, and a conservative radio host. As per usual, the candidate options tend to be older, white, and male, but there is some diversity with two African American and two Indian American candidates, one of whom is the only female so far in the running. With the number already in the double digits so early in the race, it looks to increase further before the nominee is found.
Overloading the candidate pool may very well help cement another Trump-Biden head-to-head, only the future will tell. In the interim, it is necessary to know where each potential nominee stands on pressing issues of education and immigration.
The following, which is gleaned from various press reports and candidate and government websites, is not a comprehensive breakdown of each candidate’s views but a taste of their policy. On educational policies, some candidates have supported an influx of monies to boost their state’s educational outcomes, and most candidates support funneling federal and state funds to private schools as well as public, based on the parent’s choice, laying the framework for state-funded religious schooling. Each candidate has something to say about immigration, but not one of them has a comprehensive and logical plan for how to address the problem in practice, other than to advocate for illegal immigrants to work their way toward earning citizenship in a society with little to no social support structures and few legal protections for most people and even less for undocumented workers.
Education
In response to South Carolina’s abysmal education, Haley, as Governor, faced criticism for proposing a three-pronged $97 million educational funding plan which included more than $50 million on reading coaches and classroom technology.
Burgum was a mover behind 2021 legislation for North Dakota education, providing $88 million in funding into career academies across the state allowing high school students to earn educational credit through vocational work, such as apprenticeships or internships, through club participation, or through other extracurriculars.
Scott supported the CHOICE Act (Creating Hope and Opportunity for Individuals and Communities), which ensures or expands educational access for millions of students with disabilities, or from military or low-income families in the Washington D.C. area.
DeSantis banned the teaching of critical race theory in Florida schools, stating that students should not feel guilt while learning history. He eliminated Common Core requirements and replaced it with benchmarks for “excellent student thinking” focusing on civics and history which, of course, was heavily edited.
Hutchinson as governor signed a law increasing teachers’ salaries by thousands of dollars a year and proposed increasing state education funding by $550 million.
Ramaswamy advocates for shutting down the Department of Education as well as the Federal Bureau of Investigations, stating that the Department of Education uses federal funding to blackmail local schools into pushing a certain political agenda, aka “wokeism.”
Elder, a public personality, opposes sex education in schools, does not believe in critical race theory, and thinks federal and state monies should fund children’s educations as private, charter, or public schools, depending on where the parents choose to enroll their students.
During his time as Governor, Christie backed the proposal of a charter school with upgraded facilities to improve performance in an under-funded school district. While well-intentioned, the state’s attempt to repair the issue was too simplistic to address the complex set of underlying issues found in an impoverished community. A decade later, test scores have improved but the district faces issues with insufficient funding, decrepit buildings, and inefficient management.
Pence, while Indiana governor, increased the number of students receiving taxpayer dollars to pay for private school from 4,000 to more than 30,000. Despite facing opposition from others in his party, Pence created a pre-K program for Indiana, the first of its kind there, as Indiana had no state-funded pre-K program prior to 2014.
Johnson wants to increase accessibility for children with disabilities, expand support for parents to access charter schools, and close public schools which consistently record inferior performance, which sounds a lot like cutting off educational access to any kids who live near those underperforming schools.
Like the rest of the GOP candidates, Trump wants to expand school choice options and access to private schools. He promotes “patriotic education” curriculum, whatever that is, and advocates teaching “American exceptionalism” in schools, without any elaboration on what it means, why it is important, or how it will benefit students.
Immigration
Haley has plans for a national E-Verify program to verify a person’s immigration status, the same program she made mandatory for South Carolina employers, and wants to cut off access for illegal immigrants – at the border by reinstating the “Remain in Mexico” policy and by removing their access to entitlement programs. Like other candidates, she plans to defund sanctuary cities. Haley also told her state’s law enforcement officers to request, “Papers, please,” from anyone they suspect could be illegal.
In April 2023, Burgum signed legislation enacting the Office of Legal Immigration in North Dakota’s Department of Commerce. The office was created to assist in the recruitment and retention of foreign labor and will include programs to support businesses and communities which pursue, employ, and integrate legal immigrants.
In South Carolina, Tim Scott says part of the solution to the “crisis in the workforce” is going to a “merit-based immigration system.” While a merit-based immigration system could be imagined in such a way as to allow indentured servitude, Scott claims that after addressing another “crisis” at the southern border, we can solve the problem with his proposed system which will be “a marvel of the world.” We can only hope he is right.
DeSantis made headlines transporting migrants from the South to sanctuary cities and has stated previously that he would support closing the 1,954-mile U.S.-Mexico border entirely, claiming we will finish the wall started decades ago. DeSantis signed a bill invalidating migrants’ ID cards and strengthening E-verify requirements. To assist with the overwhelm at the border, DeSantis sent troops from Florida to assist in Texas, as did Burgum from North Dakota and Hutchinson from Arkansas.
Trump has a long history of referring to illegal immigrants coming across our southern border as criminals and rapists, as well as encouraging his supporters to chant, “Build the wall! Build the wall!” During Trump’s administration, 458 miles of the border wall were constructed, much of it in areas where pre-existing walls or barriers already existed.
Hutchinson splits from his counterparts in his view of refugees, stressing the importance of welcoming them to the country because they “love freedom and love America.” He advocates for U.S. involvement in international discussions. Like his compatriots, Hutchinson has no good plan of action to deal with the influx of refugees at the southern border.
Ramaswamy states he understands the desperation of immigrants seeking refuge and new life in the U.S. – as the child of immigrants, it is true that, at the least, he has a clear understanding of his parents’ immigrant experience. Despite his insight, Ramaswamy has no innovative ideas to address immigration, advocating for a merit-based system.
Elder supports eliminating birthright citizenship for children of immigrants, which would invalidate at least two of his competitors for the nomination, denying illegal immigrants access to education and hospital care, and requiring police to contact federal authorities when they encounter an undocumented individual.
Pence, like so many of the other candidates, invalidates sanctuary city designations, keeps Title 42 in place, reinstates the “Remain in Mexico” policy, and finishes the border wall. Pence also wants to deport any illegal immigrants who have committed crimes.
Christie believes immigrants should have a path to citizenship and suggests imposing fines on employers caught employing illegal workers. In 2015, Christie suggested a tracking program for immigrants who have overstayed their visas, but the suggestion was not well-received.
Perry Johnson’s plan to deal with the immigration crisis is so undefined that a Google search returned this message: We did not find any results for “Perry Johnson” + “immigration plan.”
Google Profits from Barriers to Abortion Access
Google Profits from Barriers to Abortion Access
Technology Policy Brief #91 | By: Mindy Spatt | June 27, 2023
Photo taken from: wired.com
__________________________________
Summary
A Google search for abortion services will often serve up just the opposite- ‘Pregnancy Crisis Centers’ and other fake clinics dedicated to preventing abortions rather than providing them. It isn’t a new problem, but the complaints about the misinformation that appears in searches became more urgent after the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision that enabled many states to outlaw or severely restrict the availability of abortions, forcing many women to search further afield. In response to advocates’ demands, Google promised to remedy the problems, but two recent reports say not only that it continues, but also that low income women are especially impacted, and that Google is profiting handsomely from the fake ads.
Policy Analysis
As far back as 2015, a study by Prochoice America concluded that “Crisis Pregnancy Centers” (CPCs) were deliberately trying to “lure” women to their websites with deceptive advertising tactics, bidding on keywords such as abortion and then aggressively using them in keyword based online ads. The ruse worked well, and cost was apparently no object. Prochoice America found that just two CPCs were spending $18,000 a month on pay per click advertising, purchasing over 100 keywords that also included “morning after pill” and “women’s health clinics.”
Fast forward to June 2023, and a report from Center for Countering Digital Hate which found that CPC’s are the “cornerstone of the anti-choice movement” and are spending four times as much on deceptive search ads on Google then they do on their out-and-out anti-choice campaigns.
The amount the CPCs pay Google for the ads is staggering, over $10 million in the last two years alone. The misinformation spread for that price included deceitful ads linking abortions and cancer and other serious diseases. And Google has been slow to follow through on one relatively easy fix. Although the company had previously committed to requiring disclaimers on CPC websites to clearly inform visitors that their clinics do not provide abortions, the Center’s report noted 38% of CPC sites still have no such disclaimer.
What’s worse, the false advertising is especially impacting low income women. The Tech Transparency Project (TTP) reached this conclusion in February 2023 by creating a new Google account for testers in Phoenix, Atlanta, and Miami, all for women born in 1992. Then, within each account’s advertisement personalization settings, the testers selected either high, middle or low for their household income. When the testers searched for abortion services, a higher percentage of the lower income testers drew search ads from CPCs than those who had listed themselves as high income.
TTP noted that “by serving a higher rate of crisis pregnancy center ads to lower-income women, Google is helping these centers reach their intended audience. Abortion rights groups and academic studies have noted that crisis pregnancy centers typically target women of lower socioeconomic classes…”
Profiting from false advertising isn’t the only way Google is standing in the way of access. After the Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade and some states moved to criminalize abortion, the protection of users’ healthcare information and searches related to it became far more urgent. Google had been under fire in the past for collecting and retaining sensitive healthcare data, and advocates demanded that data that law enforcement could use in prosecutions be routinely deleted. Google promised to do so, but here too, advocates from Accountable Tech found that Google failed to live up to its promises. (See Brief #153 – Health & Gender )
Now a group of democratic US Senators including Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar are pressing those demands. The Senators recently sent a letter to Google CEO Sundar Pichai, citing Accountable Tech’s investigation and an expose by the Washington Post, and strongly urging that healthcare related location data be deleted within 24 hours.
Engagement Resources
- Fake Abortion Clinics List – Say No to Unsafe Abortions, Safe to Choose.org
- May 22, 2023 Senate Letter to Google CEO
- PROFITING FROM DECEIT, Center for Countering Digital Hate
Indicted Again: Breaking Down the Classified Documents Case Against Donald Trump
Indicted Again: Breaking Down the Classified Documents Case Against Donald Trump
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #82 | By: Arvind Salem | June 26, 2023
Photo taken from: politico.com
__________________________________
Policy Summary
On June 8, 2023, Donald Trump became the first president in history to face federal criminal charges. The 37 federal felony charges stem from his alleged mishandling of classified documents from his presidency and obstruction of justice when he was investigated.
The indictment claims that boxes of classified information were stored in Mar-a-Lago, with a picture in the indictment showing boxes stacked in rows on the ballroom’s stage. The indictment also argues that Trump knew this information was classified but disregarded this fact, as shown by a July 2021 meeting in Bedminster, in which he showed off what he knew to be classified military information.
Prosecutors allege that on an audio recording, Trump said that he knew the information was classified and he was showing it to people who didn’t have appropriate clearance and that he could’ve declassified the information as President but didn’t. This occurred as the National Archives made repeated demands for Trump’s presidential records, after realizing that many documents from Trump’s presidency were missing. The National Archives started these requests in May 2021 and informed Trump that they would refer the matter to the Justice Department in June 2021. In January 2022, Trump turned over 15 boxes to the National Archives found to contain 197 documents with classified markings. The National Archives expected to find presidential records, but did not expect to find classified documents and thus referred the matter to the Justice Department in February 2022. The Justice Department opened an investigation roughly a month later. The Justice Department seeked access to the documents that Trump provided theNational Archives, but Trump’s lawyers repeatedly ask for extensions.
Two months later, on May 11, 2022, a grand jury issued a subpoena for all classified materials in Trump’s possession. Before his legal team could search Mar-a-Lago to find classified materials in compliance with the subpoena, Trump had his assistant, Walt Nauta, move 64 boxes away from the storage room, eventually moving 30 of them back to the storage room, resulting in the lawyers being unable to access 34 boxes and unwittingly lying to the Justice Department when they certified that they had conducted a search and delivered all classified materials. This is also a reason why Nauta was named a co-conspirator in the indictment for many of the charges. Nauta repeatedly told the FBI he had no knowledge of the location of the boxes, which prosecutors allege was untrue as they believe he moved the boxes himself. The Justice Department, suspecting that there were additional classified materials being stored at Mar-a-Lago, successfully obtained a warrant and seized 102 classified documents.
The Justice Department brought 37 felony charges against Trump: charges 1-31 stem from his alleged storing of 31 classified documents at Mar-a Lago, charge 32 is conspiracy to obstruct justice by allegedly attempting to keep the classified documents out of the grand jury, charge 33 is withholding a document or record by allegedly moving the boxes of classified documents so the attorneys could not present them to a grand jury, charge 34 is corruptly concealing a document or record pertaining to the alleged attempts to hide the boxes of documents from the attorney, charge 35 is concealing a document in a federal investigation pertaining to allegedly hiding the documents and causing a false certificate to be submitted to the FBI, charge 36 is a scheme to conceal by allegedly hiding continued possessions of the documents from the FBI and grand jury, charge 37 is false statements and representations stemming from statements that Trump allegedly made which caused his lawyers to make false statements to the FBI. Charges 32-36 name Nauta as a co-conspirator and he is separately charged in another count accusing him of lying to the FBI in a voluntary interview.
Policy Analysis
Trump has fairly limited options for his defense in this case, especially in relation to the cases he’s fought before. His three main options appear to be he declassified the documents before leaving office, he is a victim of selective prosecution, or at least some form of prosecutorial misconduct, and he could fight key evidence that comes from his lawyers on the grounds of attorney-client privilege.
As the investigation has proceeded, Trump, his lawyers, and his aides have all argued that the documents he keeps are his personal records that he has a right to under the Presidential Records Act. The Presidential Records Act, enacted in 1978, four years after President Nixon’s resignation, established that presidential records are government property and do not belong to the president. According to Jason R. Baron, former director of litigation at the National Archives, “Presidential records are records in the White House relating to the constitutional, statutory or other official or ceremonial duties of the president” and personal records, such as diary entries, that are not used for official government business are excluded from the definition of presidential records. Trump was also responsible under the act for separating his personal records from presidential records and handing his presidential records over to the National Archives.
However, this argument has been widely debunked and recognized as an extremely tenuous legal argument. The problem is that many of Trump’s documents were given to him by agencies and other government institutions and are property of the federal government under the Presidential Records Act and are not Donald Trump’s personal records. Many people, including former Attorney General Bill Barr have completely dismissed this argument. Moreover, the prosecution is not charging him for violating the Presidential Records Act, since the Act includes no enforcement mechanism, and is instead being charged under the Espionage Act for illegally retaining national defense information. A related argument is that Trump said he had unlimited power to declassify the documents as President and that he did so. However, Trump admitted on a recording that at least some of the documents he showed to people were classified and that he didn’t declassify them as president.
Another one of Trump’s options would be claiming that he is a victim of selective prosecution since he was charged for the mishandling of classified documents, but other officials such as Hillary Clinton and Mike Pence were not charged for a similar offense. However, those cases have significant differences to this case. Both Clinton and Pence largely cooperated with the government, whereas Trump made significant attempts to obstruct the investigation. For Clinton, she mostly cooperated by turning over 30,000 work-related emails to the FBI and instructed an employee to delete any emails older than 60 days from her personal account. Later, an employee of the company that managed Clinton’s servers realized that the emails hadn’t been deleted and proceeded to delete them using a software program called Bleachbit the same month as the House was investigating Clinton for using her personal email for work-related matters. In further investigations, the FBI found no evidence that the emails were deleted in an effort to conceal them.
For Pence, he had much less classified material at his house (around a dozen documents were found at his home) and the FBI consensually searched his home and found one more. Pence also cooperated fully with the authorities, whereas President Trump stored hundreds of documents containing extremely sensitive information about the country’s military plans and nuclear arsenal and did not cooperate with the authorities to return them.
Trump is also likely to attempt to throw out evidence provided by his lawyer M. Evan Corcoran to the prosecution by arguing attorney-client privilege. The evidence, specifically notes of their meetings that Mr. Corcoran recorded on his iPhone, is some of the prosecution’s strongest evidence and it shows Trump attempting to avoid complying with the subpoena. However, the prosecution argued that the evidence could be used, by using an exception to attorney-client privilege known as the crime-fraud exception. The crime-fraud exception can be invoked when there is reason to believe that legal services have been used to further a crime, which prosecutors will argue occurred when Trump misled Corcoran about complying with the subpoena.
However, a potential bright spot for Trump could be the assignment of one of his appointed judges, Judge Aileen M. Cannon, to the case. Judge Cannon has a history of issuing abnormally favorable decisions to President Trump, so favorable that one was unanimously reversed by the conservative Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit. Judge Cannon set the trial date for August 14th, but it is extremely unlikely to start by then. Trump’s team is likely to have a bevy of pretrial motions, such as selective prosecution and motioning to throw out evidence from Corcoran as mentioned earlier, which will take time to argue and rule on. Additionally, Prosecutor Jack Smith requested to delay the trial by around 4 months: from August 14th to December 11th, arguing that both sides need more time to prepare and the defense does not object to moving the trial date. However, Judge Cannon is clearly trying to ensure a speedy trial by setting a deadline for July 24th for filing pre-trial motions, although she has not yet ruled on the motion to delay the trial. Additionally, since this case deals with classified information, Trump’s lawyers need to obtain appropriate security clearances to handle that information. They started that process quite recently, around a week before at the time of writing, but the process can take months, adding another reason why both sides argue that the trial should be delayed.
Prosecutor Jack Smith has also recently turned over his first batch of evidence to the Trump legal team to review, including evidence from the subpoena and search warrants, transcripts of grand jury testimony, witness interviews, and excerpts of closed-circuit television footage.
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 American democracy and argues against many practices today such as gerrymandering and mass incarceration. Readers who are concerned about the health and protection of our democracy in light of this indictment may wish to support the Brennan Center and help it advance its proposed reforms.
The Conservative Political Action Coalition
The Conservative Political Action Coalition (CPAC) is a conservative advocacy organization that seeks to promote conservatism, which it defines as popular sovereignty, and enact conservative policies. Readers against this indictment or wishing to help promote conservative values and policies may wish to give to this organization or get involved in their work.
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.
The Week That Was: Global News in Review
The Week That Was: Global News in Review
Foreign Policy Brief #80 | By: Abran C | June 21, 2023
Photo taken from: ndtv.com
__________________________________
US – China talks
Late last week US Secretary of State Antony Blinken began a visit to China in an effort by both Beijing and Washington to normalize relations after a particularly tense year. Blinken was originally scheduled to visit China in February, but his trip was canceled after the US shot down what was determined by officials to be a “Chinese spy balloon” over US territory and domestic military sites. This visit marks the first time since 2018 that a senior US official makes a visit to China. The main focus of Bliken’s trip has been re-establishing communication and attempting to ensure the differences between the two countries does not devolve into armed conflict. After a meeting with Chinese President Xi on Monday, Blinken said that the US had achieved its limited objectives and was satisfied with the progress made. Additionally, president Xi was reported to have said he was pleased with the outcome of Blinken meeting with himself and with top Chinese diplomats. Thus the diplomatic visit, though short, ended in a positive light between the two world powers, a good first step in today’s increasingly polarized and militarized international area.
Boat carrying migrants sinks off the coast of Greece and UN report on displacement
At least 79 people have died with many more missing after a fishing boat carrying refugees and migrants sank off the southern coast of Greece last week. Rescuers saved 104 passengers made up of citizens of multiple countries, including Egyptians, Syrians, Pakistanis, Afghans and Palestinians. The boat which was bound for Italy is believed to have sailed from eastern Libya before capsizing off the coast of Greece. Last year, nearly 3,800 people died on migration routes from the Middle East and North Africa attempting to reach Europe, the highest number recorded there since 2017. The number of displaced people around the globe has reached a record high of 110 million according to a new report released by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Wars, climate change, collapsing and deteriorating conditions in multiple countries all contribute to the growing global number of refugees. Of the total refugees in need of international protection, about half of them came from just three countries, Syria, Ukraine and Afghanistan.
Civil war in Sudan
Last week the intense war waged between the Sudanese army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) hit the two month mark. The fighting between the army and the RSF has forced more than 2.2 million people to flee from their homes and caused an acute humanitarian crisis. The conflict has concerned many international players, including Russia, the United States and regional powers, all of whom are vying for influence in Sudan. Saudi Arabia and the US brokered pre-negotiation talks in the Saudi city of Jeddah between the warring sides, urging the combatants to agree to a lasting ceasefire. In a slow start to negotiations the two sides agreed to the start of a 72-hour ceasefire beginning on Sunday.
The Country’s Debt Ceiling is Some Students’ Floor
The Country’s Debt Ceiling is Some Students’ Floor
Education Policy Brief #81 | By: Steve Piazza | June 21, 2023
Photo taken from: businessinsider.com
__________________________________
On his first day in office, President Biden extended a “pause” on student college loan repayments as part of Covid relief efforts which had started in March, 2020 under Section 3513 of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act. Since the January, 2021 Executive Order, the pause has been extended eight times.
Meanwhile, two lawsuits as to the constitutionality of an Executive Order on student loan forgiveness that President Biden announced on August 24, 2022 have now made their way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which is planning on issuing a ruling soon. Regardless of how the USSC rules in the cases (Biden v. Nebraska and U.S. Department of Education v. Brown), the Biden administration has stated that the end of the pause is near, seeing its termination to come some time in August.
Leaving nothing to chance, Senator Ted Budd of North Carolina, added an amendment, S.Amdt.127 to the recent debt ceiling bill, formally known as H.R.3746 or the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023. The amendment purported to prohibit any further pauses in payment, but in the end it was never brought to a vote.
The FRA was passed on June 6, 2023, and the debt crisis was avoided, but the fact that loan forgiveness language somehow still found itself included in a debt ceiling bill shows how far reaching the divisiveness of the loan forgiveness debate can go.
Analysis
According to various estimates, over 38 million people owe more than $1.78 trillion on loans taken for college. The Biden administration’s forgiveness program calls for waiving up to $10,000 for individuals making $125,000 a year or less, and up to $20,000 for those who had received Pell grants. Eliminating debt for qualified borrowers could cost the government $400 billion dollars according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), while the Education Department puts that figure more at $305 billion.
President Biden’s announcement to forgive all or portions of qualified students’ loans came as a relief to some and an outrage to others. Republicans immediately sought to block the program and took the administration to court.
This has left many borrowers confused and uncertain as to where they stand.
The pause in payments may have prolonged the need for clarity, but once the pause is lifted, the smoothness of the repayment process is anybody’s guess.
Regardless of when the pause is removed, it still raises the question about how the pause found its way into the FRA at all. Perhaps it’s not surprising when we consider that the bill also includes other contentious items, among them a reduction in the amount allotted to the IRS for its tax revenue recovery effort, an increase in work age requirements for those receiving assistance for food and other necessities, and the retrieval of unspent covid relief funds. All these give cause for Republicans to claim victory.
One reason items like this end up in debt legislative discussions is clearly reflected in a press release by Senator Ted Budd (R-NC): “Throughout this process, I have said that we should only raise the debt ceiling if we fix Washington’s spending addiction. Unfortunately, this bill fails to do that.”
In other words, any spending item can become a target. The problem here is that Senator Budd is conflating defaulting on what is owed with what is needed in the future.
It should be noted that a request for a clarification received no response from Senator Budd’s office. Nonetheless, that argument is nothing new and surfaces every time a debt ceiling deadline looms.
This of course has been written off as the nature of negotiations. As the President said, “No one got everything they wanted but the American people got what they needed.” There’s truth to this point as the bill has left a good part of the Inflation Reduction Act unscathed.
But, a soundbyte such as this seems like it’s referring to federal debt crisis circumvention, when in reality the bill also includes other items that have been causing a divide between the two parties, and the country. For example, in addition to those stated above, Joe Manchin finally secured the removal of regulations holding up completion of the West Virginia Mountain Valley Pipeline.
In the flurry of desperation amidst sounds of impending doom in the media, it’s easy to get the sense that the American public are all in that without a debt ceiling agreement, the economy would be seriously in danger.
What isn’t so apparent is that it seems that anything on either side’s agenda, no matter how incongruous, becomes appropriate to place on the table and just get it done because it’s what’s best for the country.
Many people who owe large sums of money for their education, may feel differently.
Engagement Resources
- The Student Debt Crisis Center (SDCC) advocates for the end to the college tuition debt crisis. For more information on their efforts, click here.
- The Student Borrower Protection Center (SBPC) has dedicated itself to protect borrowers’ rights amidst a predatory lending environment.
The Spread of Political Misinformation and How to Stop It
The Spread of Political Misinformation and How to Stop It
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #81 | By: Rudolph Lurz | June 21, 2023
Photo taken from: hewlett.org
__________________________________
On December 4th, 2016, Edgar Welch drove several hours from his North Carolina home and entered the Comet Ping Pong pizza restaurant in Washington, D.C. carrying an AR-15 rifle. He demanded to know where Hillary Clinton was keeping the child sex slaves. Mr. Welch proceeded to fire rounds into locks to gain access to rooms, finding only pizza supplies and terrified employees. He was later sentenced to four years in prison and expressed remorse for his actions. Mr. Welch felt compelled to help the children after reading horrifying things online about how prominent Democrats were torturing kids in the basement of that particular pizza restaurant. Employees and customers suffered psychological damage as a result of Mr. Welch’s actions, believing that they were about to become the victims of a mass shooting.
Mr. Welch acted on a popular conspiracy theory, spread by disgraced outlets such as Alex Jones’s “Infowars”. It is one of the central tenets of the Q-Anon group. Roughly 1 in 3 Republicans believed that the radical views espoused by Q-Anon were “mostly true” at the time of Mr. Welch’s crimes.
The core of these theories sounds like the plot of a bad Netflix movie. Global elites have a child sex trafficking system and prominent liberals from D.C. to Hollywood are their pedophile clients. Elderly Democrats such as Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden are consuming the blood of these tortured children to artificially prolong their lives. The more grievously children are tortured, the stronger the amount of adrenochrome in the kids’ blood. “Adrenochrome” is the fabricated element that provides longevity for anyone who drinks the blood. In this foul conspiracy theory, sex trafficking children have two positive outcomes for the liberal elites – producing revenue for the Democratic Party and producing “adrenochrome” for the powerful to consume.
Donald Trump steadfastly refused to condemn Q-Anon, even during the 2020 election four years later, stating that he liked how they “were against pedophilia”. Trump’s public acceptance of Q-anon’s beliefs has contributed to its staying power in the public sphere. In 2022, 16% of Americans, nearly 44 million people, still believed that there was truth to the conspiracies espoused by Q-Anon.
Analysis
It is hard for me to believe that we are in this dystopian post-truth position as a nation. Yet at the same time, it can be seen as the inevitable consequence of the movement from the neutral news broadcasts of Walter Cronkite and Tom Brokaw to 24/7 partisan news consumption via social media and outlets like Newsmaxx and Fox News.
I teach logical fallacies and cognitive biases in my classes. The primary issue I see playing out with Q-Anon and Pizzagate is confirmation bias. It’s a major issue with high school and college students on their academic essays. They seek out and cite information that helps their argument and ignore anything that contradicts it.
Partisan talking heads provide folks with high volumes of confirmation bias on demand. If folks are listening to Sean Hannity or Tucker Carlson, they think that government bureaucrats are socialist Deep State operatives with far more influence than they actually possess.
If they are listening to Alex Jones or virulent Q-Anon peddlers online, they can fall victim to the kind of mental poison which brought Mr. Welch to that D.C. pizza shop and later brought 10,000 furious rioters to the Capitol on January 6th, 2021.
People who don’t like Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden will click on negative links about Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden. If those links reinforce their existing beliefs, they will share them with their friends and online followers. If they see an article has been shared or viewed thousands of times, it gives it an aura of legitimacy, even if the information it describes makes zero logical sense.
Marjorie Taylor Green, a U.S. representative from Georgia, frequently espouses Q-Anon theories in the public sphere, including calling Democrats a “party of pedophiles” on 60 Minutes. Seeing politicians like MTG or Trump say these things further solidifies viewpoints tainted by confirmation bias.
Insults of Democrats which denigrated their policies as socialism and big government have been in the public sphere since the days of Harry Truman. It’s one thing to disagree with political opponents, even furiously. It’s quite another to actually believe that political opponents are consuming the blood of tortured children.
How can we engage with 44 million people whose beliefs are so far removed from reality?
If one person with a rifle can be convinced to terrorize a pizza shop, and ten thousand rioters can be compelled to storm the U.S. Capitol four years later, what will come next if we fail to act?
It has to begin with digital and information literacy measures at all levels of our education system. Students have to be able to identify legitimate sources, recognize biases, and defend arguments with evidence in a civil manner. There is more information available on a cell phone today than an entire library two decades ago.
What good is it to have all that information if we cannot recognize reality when we see it?
I cannot believe that it is necessary to write and publish this article, but the fact remains that 44 million people cannot be ignored. For the future of the country, these ridiculous and dangerous falsehoods must be confronted and refuted. Students need to learn the skills to be able not only to thrive in an Information Age economy, but also how to avoid and neutralize the virulent misinformation which leads to political extremism.
There were college graduates among the ten thousand rioters who assaulted democracy itself on January 6th, 2021. We have to do a better job with our future graduates. We must abandon this post-truth dystopia that leads to terror and authoritarianism. Otherwise, the next attack will arrive with even more numbers and more violence.
Engagement Resources
Examining the Impeachment of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton
Examining the Impeachment of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #80 | By: Ian Milden | June 21, 2023
Photo taken from: dallasnews.com
__________________________________
The Texas State House voted to impeach state Attorney General Ken Paxton on May 27th after a lengthy and quiet investigation by a bipartisan state house committee. This brief will discuss the accusations against Paxton that led to his impeachment.
Analysis
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R-TX) has been impeached by the Texas State House of Representatives. Impeachments are formal accusations by the legislature of official misconduct by officials in the executive or judicial branches of government. Impeachments in state and federal politics are rare. Under Texas state law, Paxton is suspended from his role as Attorney General until a trial in the state senate resolves his situation.
In the impeachment articles, Paxton is accused of corruptly using his office to help Austin real estate developer and businessman Nate Paul in his business dealings. The impeachment articles also accuse Paxton of engaging in bribery after Paul hired a woman that Paxton had an extramarital affair with in exchange for favorable intervention in legal entanglements that Paul’s business faced. Paul was arrested by the FBI on June 9th in connection with matters related to the Paxton impeachment.
The FBI is also investigating Paxton regarding these allegations. The FBI is believed to have opened their investigation after receiving tips from staff members in the Texas Attorney General’s office. Paxton fired the staff members who reported him to the FBI, which resulted in a wrongful termination lawsuit against the state. After the lawsuit was settled for millions of dollars, the state legislature quietly began an investigation into Paxton.
The impeachment articles also accuse Paxton of lying to investigators about several matters including an accusation of securities fraud, which predated Paxton’s time as state Attorney General. Paxton was indicted for securities fraud back in 2015, but that case has yet to go to trial due to multiple legal filings attempting to change the venue. It appears that Texas state law prevents Paxton from being impeached for the securities fraud offense itself since it occurred before he took office.
While the vast majority of Republicans in the state house have turned on Paxton, he still has some supporters in national and state politics. Donald Trump put out a statement in Paxton’s defense. At least 25 Republicans in the state house did not vote to impeach Paxton. The state senate, which will conduct the trial, has historically been more ideologically conservative than the state house.
The ideological bent of the state senate might not be the only thing that could help Paxton keep his job if this impeachment case goes to trial. Paxton’s wife is a member of the state senate, so should be able to give her husband an indication of which way her colleagues are leaning. Paxton’s wife also has some financial entanglements with his campaign. Paxton’s wife has not said whether she will recuse herself in the upcoming trial. Dan Patrick, the Lieutenant Governor and presiding officer of the state senate, has also loaned Paxton money. Patrick would preside over the impeachment trial, and he has considerable influence over the legislative priorities and committee assignments in the state senate.
While it is unclear when exactly the trial will start, it will be done sometime this summer. The state senate will approve of rules for the trial on June 20th. The latest possible start date is August 28th.
Wetlands Protection Under Attack as a Result of New Supreme Court Decision
Wetlands Protection Under Attack as a Result of New Supreme Court Decision
Environment Policy Brief #155 | By: Todd J. Broadman | June 14, 2023
Photo taken from: reuters.com
__________________________________
SCOTUS has been taking up cases that concern the scope of EPA (as well as other agencies’) authority. The Court’s ruling on a recent case – Sackett vs. EPA – will have environmental protection implications for decades to come. This case centers around the Clean Water Act (CWA), legislation passed in 1972.
Back in 2004, Chantell and Michael Sackett purchased two-thirds of an acre of property in rural Idaho, situated about 500 feet from the shores of Priest Lake, for $23,000 with the intent of building their vacation home. Shortly after they began preparing the ground for construction in 2007, a neighbor filed a complaint with the EPA who soon after issued an order to the Sacketts to stop work immediately – the order read that their land was federally protected wetland. Further, they were instructed to remove the gravel that had been poured onto the lot. The Sackett’s initial law suit was filed in 2008, and has been winding its way through the court system for the last 14 years. SCOTUS unanimously affirmed in 2012 that the Sacketts could challenge the law – central to the litigation was whether or not their property can be defined as Waters of the United States (WOTUS).
WOTUS are bodies of water that are “navigable.” And therefore, the EPA is charged with regulating pollutants that may run into “navigable waters.” Even though the Sackett’s property did not have a “continuous surface connection” to “navigable waters,” the EPA argued they had jurisdiction because their property has an “indirect” subsurface connection to Priest Lake. Before SCOTUS heard the case, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the EPA and the definitions as laid out in the CWA.
In a 9-0 decision, SCOTUS unanimously reversed the Ninth Circuit’s decision. In the majority opinion, the Sackett’s property is not to be considered WOTUS under CWA; the implications are far reaching. Although the decision in favor of the Sacketts was unanimous, there was a sharp divide in the opinions issued by the Justices.
Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, further narrowed the definition of the term “waters of the United States” (WOTUS) as “relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water” such as “streams, oceans, rivers, and lakes.” By this definition, most U.S. wetlands are not considered WOTUS and thus not under EPA authority. There is an exception if the wetland in question has a “continuous surface connection” to WOTUS. Because the Sacketts’ land does not have a “continuous surface connection,” their property is not part of WOTUS.
According to Jon Devine, the director of NRDC’s federal water policy team, the original legislation was not intended to provide, as Justice Alito argued, a narrow definition of WOTUS. To the contrary, Devine contends that WOTUS be made up of “all the relevant parts of an aquatic ecosystem, including streams, wetlands, and small ponds—things that aren’t necessarily connected to the tributary system on the surface, but that still bear all kinds of ecological relationships to that system and to one another.”
In 2006, a similar case came before the Court – Rapanos v. U.S. In that case, Judge Scalia applied the term “navigable” as well as “continuous surface connection” to waters that come under the CWA, while Justice Kennedy maintained a broader definition: “wetland that shares a significant nexus with another, adjacent body of water that is already protected.” The inference is that if the wetland is subject to pollution so will the nearby water. Judge Alito and others on the majority saw it similar to Scalia though, stating that the EPA’s broader definition leads to “serious vagueness concerns.” The narrower definition, according to Earthjustice, could open up for development 60 million acres of U.S. wetlands.
Analysis
Some environmental law experts see Sackett as the most significant water-related Supreme Court decision in a generation. There is a clear trend: the Court wants to pull back and further limit Agency authority from broadly interpreting written statutes. This was evident in the U.S. v. West Virginia case. This ruling will even open up to scrutiny wetlands and other bodies of water currently under EPA regulation. “The notion that the law can’t protect a body of water, simply because there’s a road between it and another body of water that’s unquestionably protected, is absurd and unscientific,” echoes NRDC’s Jon Devine.
Interestingly, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, in his minority opinion, supports Devine’s same view – that “it would defeat the purpose of the Clean Water Act” and that “the Court’s rewriting of adjacent to mean adjoining” defeats what was originally intended as environmental protection in the CWA. Justice Kagan is in agreement here with Kavanaugh when she writes that “in ordinary language, one thing is adjacent to another not only when it is touching, but also when it is nearby. So, for example, one house is adjacent to another even when a stretch of grass and a picket fence separate the two.” They concur with experts in the field of water ecology who see “grave consequences for the protection of the nation’s freshwater resources.” A victory for big monied industry lobbyists who would err on the side of throwing caution to the wind when it comes to wetlands development.
Moving forward, the EPA will have no authority to regulate wetlands unless and until they can show that the water in question is “navigable” and “adjoins” a body of water that falls under the CWA with a “continuous surface connection.” States and municipalities have already begun to amend their rules in response to the Sackett decision. Although individuals such as the Sacketts would not have posed a pollution threat, larger industrial scale polluters will seize upon this ruling to develop and spoil land that would otherwise have been protected.
Engagement Resources
- https://earthjustice.org/ serves more than a thousand public-interest clients, providing top-tier legal representation in their fight for environmental justice.
- https://www.eli.org/ fosters innovative, just, and practical law and policy solutions to enable leaders across borders and sectors to make environmental, economic, and social progress.
- https://pacificlegal.org/ a nonprofit legal organization that defends Americans’ liberties when threatened by government overreach and abuse.
- https://americanagnetwork.com/ provides daily news, market and ag weather content to affiliate radio stations and listeners across much of the Upper Midwest.