JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
Presidential Plans to Circumvent the Supreme Court Veto of The Student Loan Program
Brief #86 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by Arvind Salem
Biden has unveiled the SAVE plan… Rather than a conventional loan forgiveness plan.
A Depressing Look at the Current List of GOP Presidential Candidates
Brief #85 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by Abigail Hunt
As the political primary season looms, the candidates of the Grand Ol’ Party are going to extreme lengths…
Education Will Be a Hot Button Political Issue in 2024
Brief #82 – Education Policy Brief
by Rudolph Lurz
Zeal for conservative education ideas has not equated to good education policy in recent history.
Supreme Court Declares Affirmative Action Unconstitutional
Brief #207 – Civil Rights Policy Brief
by Rodney A. Maggay
While the decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College was a disappointing decision it was not unexpected.
Temperatures are going up as the trees are coming down
Brief #156 – Environment Policy Brief
by Todd J. Broadman
There is good research to suggest that there is a tipping point in which the Amazon can become too dry due to lack of rainfall and turn into savanna.
Supreme Court Misconstrues Religious Liberty Again In New Discrimination Case
Brief #208 – Civil Rights Policy Brief
by Rodney A. Maggay
Ms. Smith brought a lawsuit in federal district court seeking an injunction prohibiting Colorado from enforcing the State’s anti – discrimination statute against her and forcing her to create wedding websites for all customers.
DEMOCRATIC PARTY PLATFORM SUGGESTIONS PART 2: HEALTHCARE
OF ED
U.S. Resist News
The US healthcare system is extremely fragmented. Healthcare access varies from state to state and according to income level and racial and ethnic background.
Book Review: Traffic: Genius, Rivalry and Delusion in the Billion-Dollar Race to Go Viral, Ben Smith, Penguin Press, N.Y., 2023.
Brief #92 – Technology Policy Brief
by Mindy Spatt
Ben Smith describes how the founders of upstart news sites like Gawker and the Huffington Post started off racing to post breaking, under-reported news and ended up in a race for online traffic.
Democrats’ Attempts to Rearrange the Primary Calendar Have Put Biden in a Bind
Brief #84 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by Ian Milden
There’s not a particularly good solution available to Biden and the DNC in resolving the primary calendar dilemma.
Don’t Say Gay Reprise: A Look Ahead
Don’t Say Gay Reprise: A Look Ahead
Education Policy Brief #82 | By: Rudolph Lurz | April 7, 2023
Header photo taken from: ulink.miami.edu
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
March 28th, 2023 marked the first anniversary of the signing of Florida’s controversial Parental Rights in Education Act. Critics have commonly labeled it as the “Don’t Say Gay” law. The law effectively prohibits the instruction of sexual orientation and gender identity in grades K-3 in Florida classrooms, and gives parents the opportunity to sue school districts if the policy is violated. Governor DeSantis and his allies argue that the law is necessary to prevent “grooming” of minors. Governor DeSantis, in a heated exchange with a reporter, repeated those arguments and noted additionally that it was inappropriate for kindergartners to discuss sexual topics in their classrooms. At the time of the bill’s debate and passage into law, DeSantis frequently criticized the term “Don’t Say Gay” as a misrepresentation by the media. The age of children in question is a frequent defense by DeSantis and his allies in the Florida Legislature and beyond.
Multiple other states are copying Florida’s law, demonstrating that there are strong currents in the GOP pulling for these cultural measures in the classroom. A bill in the U.S. House of Representatives aims to expand the law’s language to prohibit instruction at any building or agency that receives federal funding, which would potentially include some libraries and after school programs. Despite DeSantis’s early insistence that the law’s aim was to protect young children in grades K-3, Florida’s Department of Education is attempting to expand the provisions of the law into grades 4-12. The vague language of the law has a chilling effect on classroom discussions on any subject matter that approaches these topics, as educators fear losing their employment or subjecting their district to a lawsuit.
Photo taken from: mynews13.com
Project Analysis
I began my teaching career at a rural Title I school in central Florida. I conducted my dissertation research on education policy formation in Florida. I am familiar with Governor DeSantis’s past and his political acumen.
On the surface, the Governor’s policies, which are part of a broader culture war, do not seem to make much sense. His anti-LGBTQ+ stance and other social policies have alienated younger voters. The “Don’t Say Gay” debate sparked a huge fight with Disney, one of the largest employers in the state. Generally speaking, conservatives tend to be pro-business and strong supporters of the free market economy. Wielding the power of the state to meddle with a large corporation’s policies, especially a behemoth like Disney, seems like a real head scratcher.
Unlike former President Trump, Governor DeSantis does not shoot from the hip and improvise his political attack angles. He is a shrewd, Harvard-educated politician who trounced his gubernatorial opponent by twenty points in what was once a swing state. If he takes a strong stance on a position, it is because he sees a quantitative advantage.
Photo taken from: wcjb.com
If one looks past the noise, Governor DeSantis’s tactics are straight out of the traditional GOP playbook to put Democrats on the wrong side of 60/40 cultural issues. In 2004, that cultural issue was marriage equality. Ohio’s Marriage Protection Amendment was widely viewed as a ballot initiative to drive up conservative turnout. At the time, same-sex marriage was opposed by 60% of Americans. By 2012, that figure swung to over 50% opposition in swing states to banning same sex marriage at the federal level.
Today, marriage equality is both settled law and politically popular. Culture warriors like Governor DeSantis needed a new 60/40 issue to galvanize support and paint opponents as extremists. They simply moved from left to right on the LGBTQ+ acronym to attack the TQ+ portion of it. A recent poll by YouGov showed that just 32% of Americans would be “very supportive” if their child came out as transgender, and just 14% of Republicans.
Governor DeSantis recognizes that this is a political winner for him, so it’s no surprise he will continue promoting legislation that puts the issue front and center in the public sphere. With a budget surplus in excess of twenty billion dollars, the Governor can afford to antagonize Disney. They are unlikely to pack up and leave the state, considering they have multiple theme parks and resorts located in central Florida. With a margin of victory approaching twenty percentage points, he can afford to antagonize younger voters with his social policies. With Florida’s large (and growing) senior population, the polling figures will likely continue to land in his favor.
DeSantis’s crusade might be a solution in search of a problem, but as long as he’s on the correct side of state and national polling, he’ll keep advancing it.
Follow us for the latest U.S. RESIST News!
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
For further engagement on this topic, consult the homepage of Florida’s largest teacher’s union, along with Florida’s Department of Education
Insulin Prices: Are They Low Enough?
Insulin Prices: Are They Low Enough?
Health & Gender Policy Brief #159 | By: Geoffrey Small | April 5, 2023
Header photo taken from: nbcnews.com
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
As the U.S. healthcare system continues to fall short, when compared to other peer countries, the battle for insulin prices highlights just one of the major issues the country is facing. Congress recently passed The Inflation Reduction Act, where the cost of insulin was capped for senior citizens on Medicare Part D starting in 2023. President Biden also announced that major drug manufacturers of insulin are also capping their prices to meet the demand. Despite the efforts of legislation, the Biden administration and major drug company manufactures, critics are calling on Congress to pass a uniform law which mandates that the price of insulin be capped for all Americans.
Photo taken from: insights.bu.edu
Policy Analysis
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
On August 16th, 2022, President Biden signed The Inflation Reduction Act. A major component of the bill, which was sponsored by Democratic Senators Chuck Schumer and Joe Manchin, required all insulin prices for senior citizens on Medicare Part D to be capped at $35. This news was welcomed from advocacy groups like the American Diabetes Association. In their press release, they stated that “$1 in every $3 spent on prescription drugs in the U.S. is spent on someone with diabetes, and this out-of-pocket cost limit will benefit people with diabetes who rely on more than just insulin to survive.” The new law also caps all prescription drug costs for senior citizens on Medicare Part D at $2000 per year.
It is well known that critics believe The Inflation Reduction Act does not do enough to reduce the cost of prescription drug prices for all U.S. citizens. That is why on March 2nd the Biden administration announced that Eli Lilly, the largest U.S. insulin manufacturer, is lowering their cost of insulin by 70%. Other major drug companies are also following their example. Capping the prices for insulin will also reduce health inequality for minorities. According to studies, conducted in-part by the CDC, Native Americans, African Americans, and Hispanic groups are being diagnosed with diabetes at proportionally higher rates than other ethnicities.
Despite all of the efforts to reduce the cost burden for individuals diagnosed with diabetes, critics still believe States and Congress can do more. A recent Yale Study concluded that 14% of people on insulin used at least 40% of their available income to pay for the prescription. The study indicated that insulin prices have more than doubled in the past decade. Kasia Lipska, an associate professor at Yale School of Medicine, stated “this is not inflation, there’s much more going on.”
Photo taken from: cdc.gov
In Iowa, AARP State Director Brad Anderson explained that “there are still around a quarter of a million Iowans on health insurance plans that are regulated by the state, where their insulin is not capped at $35 per month.” Anderson believes the recent caps are a move in the right direction, but emphasizes that companies can change or eliminate the caps at any time. That is why uniformity at the state or federal level is needed to avoid the confusion on who benefits from the recent changes.
Efforts are being made to reduce the cost of insulin at the federal level. However, more cost control needs to be mandated to ensure healthcare equality . That is why donating to advocacy groups like the American Diabetes Association are instrumental for advocating more uniform federal and state laws. We need laws on insulin costs that benefit everyone in the U.S. who has been diagnosed with diabetes.
Donate to the American Diabetes Association
Follow us for the latest U.S. RESIST News!
The Current Status of Congressional Efforts to Pass Gun Control Legislation
The Current Status of Congressional Efforts to Pass Gun Control Legislation
Social Justice Policy Brief #145 | By: Inijah Quadri | April 5, 2023
Header photo taken from: abcnews.go.com
Policy Issue Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Gun control legislation has been a contentious issue in the United States for decades. As the debate surrounding the Second Amendment and its implications for American society continues, we will provide a thorough, fact-based analysis of the current status of congressional efforts to pass gun control legislation. This Brief will cover recent trends in mass shootings, the prevalence of gun ownership, the power of the Second Amendment, the role of weapons of mass destruction, and the impact of a gun violence reduction law signed by President Biden last year.
Photo taken from: washingtonmonthly.com
Recent Trends in Mass Shootings
The United States has experienced a troubling increase in mass shootings over the past several years. High-profile incidents such as Columbine, Sandy Hook, Parkland, Uvalde, and Nashville have sparked national conversations about gun control measures. According to the Gun Violence Archive, year on year, there is usually an uptick in mass shootings in the USA. This upward trend underscores the urgency for Congress to address gun control measures.
Gun Ownership and the Second Amendment
The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution has long been used to defend the right to bear arms. It states, “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” According to a recent Gallup poll, approximately 32% of Americans own guns, while 44% live in households with guns. This widespread ownership, coupled with the Second Amendment, complicates efforts to enact gun control legislation.
Weapons of Mass Destruction and Past Efforts to Ban Them
In addition to discussions about everyday firearms, the debate around gun control legislation often includes concerns about weapons of mass destruction. The United States has implemented several bans on such weapons in the past, including the Federal Assault Weapons Ban. This ban lasted from 1994 to 2004. However, attempts to reinstate similar bans have been met with resistance from pro-gun lobbyists and lawmakers.
Photo taken from: findlaw.com
The Gun Violence Reduction Law and President Biden’s Stance
In 2022, President Biden signed a gun violence reduction Law, which aimed to reduce gun violence through a combination of measures such as background checks, increased mental health resources, and improved data collection. However, in a recent statement, Biden acknowledged that his hands are tied in enacting further gun control measures and that the responsibility lies with Congress.
Current Congressional Efforts and Challenges
Despite the urgency of the situation, congressional efforts to pass gun control legislation have been slow. Divisions along party lines and the influence of powerful pro-gun lobbying groups, such as the National Rifle Association, have stalled progress. While some bipartisan efforts have emerged, such as one aimed at closing the “Charleston Loophole,” which allows individuals to obtain firearms if their background checks are not completed within three days, they have not yet resulted in significant legislative changes. The good news, though, is that while this legislation has not yet been passed at the federal level, several states have recently closed this loophole.
Conclusion
The increasing prevalence of mass shootings and gun violence in the United States highlights the importance of addressing gun control measures. While efforts like the gun violence reduction law have been implemented, the responsibility for further action lies with Congress. As the debate surrounding gun control continues, it is essential to keep in mind the facts and the gravity of the situation. The future safety of American citizens depends on the decisions made by lawmakers and the public’s engagement in the conversation.
Follow us for the latest U.S. RESIST News
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
- Virtual Library Search
- Access Denied: How the Gun Lobby is Depriving Police, Policy Makers, and the Public of the Data We Need to Prevent Gun Violence
- FACT SHEET: President Biden Announces New Actions to Reduce Gun Violence and Make Our Communities Safer
- NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION
- Understanding the 1994 assault weapons ban and why it ended
- Which states have closed or limited the Charleston Loophole?
- What Percentage of Americans Own Guns?
- Gun Violence Archive GUN VIOLENCE ARCHIVE
A New Standard For Homelessness Prevention Programs
A New Standard For Homelessness Prevention Programs
Social Justice Policy Brief #144 | By: Caroline Howard | April 4, 2023
Header photo taken from: stjosephsgilroy.org
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Like many places in the United States, King County, Washington has had a persistent and increasing Homelessness problem for years. As of 2020, 11,751 people were experiencing homelessness in the county, and the number has only continued to grow due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Within that number, more than half were unsheltered, meaning that they were forced to sleep in conditions that are not meant for human habitation. To deal with this growing problem, the King County Regional Homelessness Authority has introduced a 5-year plan to end homelessness in the region of the state called the Homes for All plan. This plan would aim to tackle the underlying causes of homelessness by providing long-term stable housing, as well as other services such as job training programs, mental health treatment, and addiction counseling services for people with substance abuse issues.
The plan sets goals to be accomplished over the next 5 years which include building thousands of new affordable housing units, expanding rental assistance programs so people can maintain affordable housing prices, and providing services such as job training, addiction and mental health programs so people can stay housed and become self-sufficient. 23,000 of these new units will be used to help households who are already spending more than 30% of their monthly income on housing, which is considered to be housing burdened by the federal government. These units would be one of the main priorities, so people who are likely to face homelessness in the near future can be in a stable situation. The increase in rental assistance would go towards the King County Housing Choice Voucher program, which helps residents of the county pay a max of 40% of their annual income on housing and utility bills. There would also be another aspect of the plan that would focus more on specific groups like veterans, younger residents, as well people in the LGBTQ+ community.
The total price tag of this program would be roughly $25.5 billion. They plan on raising this money through new taxes, more funding through different federal government programs, and new bonds for people who want to invest in the plan. Kings County plans on implementing a new sales tax of 0.1% which would raise an estimated $50 million annually. They also plan to use the state’s new Real Estate Excise Tax, and at the federal level, gain funds from the Home Investments Partnership Program, and the Community Development Block Grant Program to finance affordable housing development. They also are hoping to garner philanthropic investment to help with other aspects of the plan to fund different services for people experiencing homelessness.
Photo taken from: dca.ga.gov
Project Analysis
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
If implemented successfully, the Homes for All plan has the potential to make a significant impact on the homeless population in King County. By creating new affordable housing units and expanding rental assistance programs, the plan would provide more stable, long-term housing solutions for those experiencing homelessness or at risk of becoming homeless. Homelessness is an ever growing issue in our country as prices for pretty much everything, including housing, are skyrocketing. While we are still in the capitalist system, we must have a multi-faceted approach to ending this issue once and for all, and this plan does just that. By helping to fund mental health treatment, rehabilitation programs for people with substance abuse issues, and funding job training programs that will allow people to gain the skills they need to start a thriving career, this plan understands that homelessness has multiple root causes in our society, and allows people not only to have stable housing, but achieve self-sufficiency through extra services that will allow people to not continue to live with the threat of homelessness weighing over them everyday. Financial stress can cause massive health issues, which leads to people falling down a rabbit hole of despair, developing addiction issues, and eventually leading to homelessness. This new plan will diminish this issue for so many people currently at threat of becoming homeless. This will allow the people of King County to not only survive, but thrive. Plans like this should be the new standard for dealing with homelessness across the country. With funding for affordable housing to get people off the streets to begin with, and then giving them the tools needed to survive on their own, this plan is an example of what can happen when communities come together and decide that the problems in their community need to end, no matter the cost.
Follow us for the latest U.S. RESIST News!
Strengths and Weaknesses of ICC Warrant for Putin’s Arrest
Strengths and Weaknesses of ICC Warrant for Putin’s Arrest
Foreign Policy Brief #178 | By: Yelena Korshunov | March 30, 2023
Header photo taken from: atlanticcouncil.org
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for the Russian president, Valdimir Putin, and Russia’s commissioner for children’s rights, Maria Lvova-Belova. The warrants were issued in relation to the forced unlawful deportation of Ukrainian children to Russia. The court’s President, Piotr Hofmanski, said in a video statement that while the ICC’s judges have issued the warrants, it will be up to the international community to enforce them, “the ICC is doing its part of work as a court of law. The judges issued arrest warrants. Their execution depends on international cooperation.”
In a response to the arrest warrants Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said that Russia found the questions raised by the ICC “outrageous and unacceptable,” and that any decisions of the court were “null and void” with respect to Russia. A spokesperson for Russia’s Foreign Ministry said the arrest warrant had “no significance whatsoever.”
“The decisions of the International Criminal Court have no meaning for our country, including from a legal point of view,” spokesperson Maria Zakharova said on her Telegram channel. “Russia is not a party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and bears no obligations under it.” However, the warrant means that Putin could be arrested and sent to The Hague if he travels to any ICC member states.
Photo taken from: aa.com.tr
Despite the pathetic speeches by Russia’s officials, issuing of the warrants is a significant act for a number of reasons. Putin seems secure in his power and safe from extradition and it’s extremely unlikely that his entourage may decide to send him to The Hague. However, the arrest warrant sends a signal to senior Russian officials that they may be vulnerable to prosecution either now or in the future and this would further limit their ability to travel internationally, including to attend important international forums and events.
Although the warrant likely will not have direct legal consequences that will result in Putin’s arrest, diplomatic impact already is visible. The ICC warrant will undoubtedly hinder Russia’s rapprochement withthose non-Western countries, with which Putin is trying to replace his damaged relationships with the US and Europe. Russia’s opposition news portal Meduza says that in 2023 the Kremlin planned to promote the image of Putin (including for the domestic Russian audience – in the run-up to the presidential elections) as a “fighter against the West”, “a defender of the countries of Latin America and Africa from colonial oppression” and “one of the main leaders of the multipolar world.” This requires foreign trips, in which Putin is now restricted due to the warrants of the International Criminal Court.. Theoretically, the president of the Russian Federation can now be detained under The Hague warrant in 123 countries, and the Kremlin certainly does not how it is possible to “ensure the safety” of the President in these new conditions. Even the former Soviet Union republics such as Tajikistan (that have ratified the Rome Statute of the ICC) cease to be a safe destination for Putin. Although it’s unlikely that someone from the countries that were previously part of the USSR might decide to arrest Putin, Russia’s president never visits a country where there is even a minimal risk of being arrested. In 2022, the Russian president, apparently fearing his own safety, did not come to the G20 in Indonesia, where they were ready to see him. Even when traveling within the country, he is increasingly trying to use a special train instead of an airplane.
Photo taken from: myinfo.com.gh
The possibility of Putin’s personal presence at the G20 summit in South Africa, which recognizes the jurisdiction of the ICC, is unlikely after the warrants have been issued. South Africa is a member of BRICS. The second BRICS member, Brazil, also recognizes the court. While the Kremlin’s largest non-Western interlocutors — China, India, and Turkey — do not recognize the ICC, it is recognized by almost all of Africa and Latin America, the continents to which Russia is trying to present itself as the flagship of the struggle against Western neocolonialism. Some African countries not only recognize the ICC, but have cooperated with it in the administration of justice.
The order may also affect the president’s relationship with his own inner circle. Court prosecutor Karim Khan called the warrant against Putin a regrettable event and the first step in a series of other investigations. If the number of similar orders for Putin’s entourage grows, we may see evidence of a repeat of the situation with the foreign sanctions that have recently been imposed on Russia. Some of Russia’s politicians will protect themselves from the risks of prosecution, while others will compete for who will be the next one to be subject to the warrant after Putin, since they now find themselves in a situation where they have no way out. If after the Western sanctions, Putin, standing above the restrictions, had watched what would happen to the people from his entourage, now it’s their turn to watch what will happen to the president. In fact, the warrant is another call to Russia’s political elite to abandon Putin, who is now literally leading them to prison. Now the risk of being detained or interrogated in countries that recognize the jurisdiction of the ICC is much higher for them, and it may encourage them to take certain steps. This entire situation recalls how the same state apparatus, which worked for Milosevic for many years, extradited him to The Hague almost immediately after his overthrow.
Follow us for the latest U.S. RESIST News!
Re-Energizing the Nations’ EV Infrastructure
Re-Energizing the Nations’ EV Infrastructure
Technology Policy Brief #82 | By: Steve Piazza | March 30, 2023
Header photo taken from: forbes.com/Getty
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The bipartisan Infrastructure Law passed back in November, 2021 has reportedly already provided funding for over 20,000 projects related to strengthening the nation’s present and future transportation and energy needs. Beyond providing support for more traditional activities focusing on highways and bridges, the law has paved the way for advancements in electric vehicle (EV) technologies.
President Biden recently announced that his administration would be working closely with the EV industry to improve the infrastructure specifically for EVs. According to a recent White House FACT SHEET, forthcoming action steps include increasing the number of charging stations, creating charging accessibility for all vehicles regardless of manufacturer, and funding for additional research and development.
These measures are designed for meeting the Administration’s goal of creating 500,000 new EV charging stations placed 50 miles apart by 2030. $7.5 billion of the Infrastructure Law is earmarked to meet that goal.
Meanwhile, another $7 billion is allocated for the development of improved battery technology and distribution.
Photo taken from: cnbc.com/Evan Vucci/AP
Project Analysis
The automobile landscape is undergoing another historic transformation. From the design of cars to the online buying and selling of them that leave car dealership lots virtually empty, the world of cars is becoming almost unrecognizable. One significant catalyst might be the way cars are being powered.
The number of EV registrations jumped over 60% in the early part of 2022, despite an overall automobile market trending downwards. The Wall Street Journal reports that over 800,000 EVs were sold last year, reaching over 5% of all car sales.
But that’s not the only change in the scenery. Just as solar panels and windmills have found their place, so too has the EV charging station. And with the recent financial support from the government, we can expect to see even more and more charging stations in retail centers, gas stations, school campuses, homes, and elsewhere.
According to the Alternative Fuels and Data Center, there are over 50,000 charging stations around the country. But with so many EVs on the road and the count projected to become 50% of all vehicles by 2030, the government is now partnering with private companies to make charging them more accessible. The list includes automobile manufacturers like Tesla, General Motors, and Ford, industry charging station leaders such as EVBox (Netherlands), Charge Point (U.S.) and ABB (Switzerland), and other energy technology firms like Francis Energy and Forum Mobility.
In the United States, Charge Point presently leads the way with 27,000 charging stations in place offering a total of 50,000 ports, followed by Tesla, with 6,000 and 28,000, respectively. But this ranking can be deceiving.
The Open Charge Point Interface Protocol, developed by the Dutch-based EV Roaming Foundation, provides a common standard used in many countries to determine the effectiveness of different charging devides and platforms,
The distance you are able to drive on a charge will vary depending on the type of charger and the length of time you leave it on. Battery size and type is another key variable that helps determine who far you can drive on a charge.
Photo taken from: forbes.com/Getty
Charging stations come in three separate port types: Level 1 (110V, similar to a standard wall outlet), Level 2 (240V, what’s used for heavy appliances in the home), and Level 3 (480V, aka Fast Charge). Level 3 uses direct current (DC), and is what constitutes most of Tesla’s ports.
Often referred to as the Level 3 Supercharger, Tesla’s proprietary ports can charge a battery in a fraction of the time it takes Charge Point’s Level 2. In 15 minutes, the Supercharger can energize a car for 200 miles of range, whereas a Level 2 charger would provide a similar range only if charged overnight. For additional perspective, the lowest of the three charging level types, Level 1 would require days to reach full charge.
But since not all EVs and charging stations are compatible and increased accessibility is what the government is attempting to accomplish, cost incentives are a logical approach.
And they seem to be working. Tesla has already pledged to install or retrofit 7500 chargers so their ports can accommodate competitors’ vehicles, while others have promised to increase the number of Level 2 or Level 3 stations.
But the effectiveness of the charging stations can only be as good as the batteries they’re charging, and though advancements in battery technology have been made, more improvement is needed.
That’s why the government is also making funds available to strengthen the supply chain. Supported programs are underway at companies, universities, and other organizations develop safer batteries that can recharge more rapidly and more often, provide longer lasting charges, and can withstand extreme temperatures.
Another objective is to reduce dependence on rare and expensive elements like nickel and cobalt, main ingredients in many existing batteries. New alternatives, which include potassium-ion or sodium metal batteries, can add to the increased use of lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries by leading global companies like China’s BYD and Tesla.
Cars, car dealerships, and parking lots may never look the same as before, but this transformation is no different than any other previous seismic shifts and seems poised to stay. Time embraces change, and incentives like these can only accelerate it.
Follow us for the latest U.S. RESIST News!
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Advocates, like Drive Electric USA, work to educate states and consumers on the benefits of EVs
Tools related to alternative fuel technologies
Dark Money in Politics: Understanding its Impact, Origins, and How to Combat It
Dark Money in Politics: Understanding its Impact, Origins, and How to Combat It
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #71 | By: Inijah Quadri | March 28, 2023
Header photo taken from: brennancenter.org/Getty/Shutterstock/BCJ
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
In recent years, there has been a growing concern about the influence of money in politics, particularly in the form of “dark money.” “Dark money” refers to political spending by groups that are not required to disclose their donors. Dark money can be used for a variety of political activities, including advertising campaigns, direct mail campaigns, and issue advocacy.
These groups are not required to disclose their donors because they are classified as non-profit social welfare organizations under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code, which allows them to keep their donors’ identities private. This form of political spending has become increasingly prevalent in the United States, and its impact on democracy is a cause for concern.
Other organizations, like political action committees (PACs), are required to disclose their donors because they are specifically designed to support or oppose political candidates, while 501(c)(4) organizations are primarily intended to promote social welfare.
This article aims to provide a comprehensive overview of dark money in politics, its origins, and its effects, as well as explore ways to combat it.
Photo taken from: publicintegrity.org
The Origins of Dark Money in Politics
The use of dark money in politics is not a new phenomenon in the United States. Dark money has been used since the 1970s, but it gained prominence after the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision. In this case, the court ruled that corporations and unions have the same First Amendment rights as individuals when it comes to spending money on political campaigns. These rights include the freedom of speech, which allows for the expression of ideas, opinions, and support for (or opposition to) political candidates or issues, including through financial contributions.
This decision opened the door for unlimited spending by corporations and unions, and it also paved the way for the rise of super PACs (Political Action Committees). Super PACs are independent political organizations that can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money on political campaigns, as long as they do not coordinate with a candidate’s campaign.
The 2010 Citizens United decision also allowed for the creation of dark money groups, which are non-profit organizations that can spend unlimited amounts of money on political campaigns, without disclosing their donors. These groups are known as 501(c)(4) organizations, after the section of the Internal Revenue Code that governs their tax status. These organizations are primarily intended to promote social welfare, but they are also permitted to engage in limited political activities, as long as those activities do not constitute their primary purpose. Due to this classification, they are not required to disclose their donors, which differentiates them from other types of political organizations, like PACs.
The Impact of Dark Money on Politics
Dark money has a significant impact on politics, as it allows wealthy individuals and corporations to have an outsized influence on the political process. By spending unlimited amounts of money on political campaigns, these groups can sway public opinion and influence the outcome of elections. Some campaigns and candidates have gotten help from dark money. For example, President Biden is reported widely to have gotten a lot of help from dark money groups for the 2020 presidential election.
The use of dark money also undermines transparency in the political process. When donors can give money to political groups without disclosing their identity, it becomes difficult to determine who is behind a particular political campaign. This lack of transparency makes it difficult for voters to make informed decisions about candidates and issues.
Furthermore, dark money can give the appearance of impropriety. When candidates receive large amounts of money from unknown sources, it can create the perception that they are beholden to these donors, rather than to their constituents.
The rules governing the size of regular campaign contributions vary depending on the type of organization and the election. For example, individuals can contribute about $3,000 per election to a federal candidate, $5,000 per year to a PAC, and about $40,000 per year to a national party committee. These limits are subject to change and are adjusted for inflation every election cycle.
Photo taken from: newyorker.com/Mark Henle/The Republic/Reuters
How to Combat Dark Money in Politics
There are several ways to combat dark money in politics, including:
a. Disclosure Laws
One way to combat dark money is to strengthen disclosure laws. This would require political groups to disclose their donors, making it easier for voters to understand who is behind a particular political campaign. This could be done at the federal level, but it could also be done at the state level.
Several states have already taken steps to increase transparency in the political process. For example, California requires all political advertisements to disclose their sponsors, and Maryland also pioneered local laws that required online platforms to disclose the sponsor of any political ad.
b. Public Financing
Another way to combat dark money is to provide public financing for political campaigns. This would give candidates an alternative to relying on wealthy donors and corporations for funding. Public financing can level the playing field and reduce the influence of special interests in the political process.
c. Overturning Citizens United
Another way to combat dark money is to overturn the Citizens United decision. This would require a constitutional amendment, which is a lengthy and difficult process. However, several states and cities have passed resolutions calling for an amendment to overturn Citizens United.
Alternatively, the Supreme Court itself could overturn Citizens United in a future case that challenges the precedent set by the decision. This has happened before with other landmark cases, such as when the Supreme Court overturned its previous ruling in Plessy v. Ferguson with the Brown v. Board of Education decision.
d. Advocacy and Education
Finally, advocacy and education can play a role in combating dark money in politics. Educating the public about the impact of dark money and advocating for stronger disclosure laws and public financing can help build momentum for reform.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Dark money in politics is a significant issue that undermines transparency and democracy, as it allows wealthy individuals and corporations to have an outsized influence on the political process. To combat dark money, strengthening disclosure laws, public financing, overturning Citizens United, and advocating for reform are all viable options. These solutions can help reduce the influence of special interests in the political process and promote true democracy. It is important for citizens to stay informed and engaged in the fight against dark money in politics.
Follow us for the latest U.S. RESIST News!
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
California Fair Political Practices Commission
California Fair Political Practices Commission Political Advertisement Disclosures
The Ukraine Crisis: Situation Update: #21
The Ukraine Crisis: Situation Update: #21
Foreign Policy Brief #177 | By: Abran C | March 28, 2023
Header photo taken from: sentinelassam.com
Vladimir Putin’s Arrest Warrant
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The International Criminal Court (ICC) has issued an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin for the alleged crime of overseeing the abduction of Ukrainian children. According to the ICC there is credible evidence of Ukrainian children being forcibly removed from their homes and being sent into Russia at the orders of President Putin. The warrant is the first to be issued by the ICC for crimes committed during the war in Ukraine. It is also one of the rare occasions where the court has issued a warrant for a sitting head of state, putting Putin in company of the former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi and the former Sudanese president Omar al-Bashir. Putin is unlikely to be handed over to the court anytime soon, Russia itself does not recognise the court’s jurisdiction. However, the Russian president will now face limits on his freedom of travel to the 123 countries that recognize the ICC’s jurisdiction as these are all places where he could be apprehended and handed over.
Photo taken from: Sputnik/Aleksey Druzhinin/Kremlin via REUTERS
Putin and Xi Jinping Hold Talks
Last week Chinese President Xi Jing Ping, now the first world leader to meet with Putin following his arrest warrant, flew to Moscow to hold talks that were set to deepen ties between the two countries. In growing conflict with the West and particularly the United States, the two have sought to present a united front. The timing of Xi’s visit was certainly a boost for Putin, just three days after the ICC accused him of war crimes it enabled him to show he still has the backing of a powerful ally who shares his opposition to the idea of a US dominated unipolar world. The summit itself produced 14 agreements on topics from soybeans to atomic energy, but also showed Russia’s possible openness to pursuing China’s version of peace talks. According to their joint statement both leaders called for the cessation of actions that increase tensions and prolong the war in Ukraine. But Putin said the plan could be put forward only when “they are ready in the West and Kyiv”. China’s plan does not explicitly call for Russia to leave Ukraine and Kyiv has made it repeatedly clear that a Russian withdrawal is a necessary precondition for it to engage in peace talks, meaning that it is still unlikely peace talks will occur anytime soon.
Photo taken from: forbes.com/Omatr Marques/Getty Images
Poland to Send Fighter Jets to Ukraine
Poland recently pledged it would send four MiG-29 fighter jets to Ukraine, the first NATO member to do so. Ukraine has been asking for fighter jets now for sometime in order to be able to better combat and repel Russian air attacks. Most of the destruction unleashed on Ukraine has come from air strikes by the Russian air force. NATO members have been hesitant to send heavy weaponry such as jets and tanks to Ukraine in order not to provoke Russia. Poland though has been one of the most vocal European nations against Russia, which is still seen by many in Poland’s political and diplomatic circles in a Cold War context. The biggest question will be if the move puts pressure on the rest of the NATO block to do the same, which was likely Poland’s intention to begin with.
Follow us for the latest U.S. RESIST News!
Banning TikTok Won’t Make the Data Safe
Banning TikTok Won’t Make the Data Safe
Technology Policy Brief #81 | By: Mindy Spatt | March 24, 2023
Header photo taken from: axios.com/Avishek Das/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
TikTok is under attack from all sides. The Biden Administration is threatening to ban the app altogether, the Justice department is investigating it, advocates say it is dangerous to children, a school district is suing, and governments in the US and the UK won’t allow their workers to use it.
Photo taken from: 9to5mac.com
Policy Analysis
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The alarm bells coming from Washington are due to security concerns over the access Chinese-owned TikTok has to American’s data. The company could avoid the threatened ban if it sells a substantial stake to an American company. It is unclear how a ban would work; although several states and the governments of the US and the UK have banned their employees from using TikTok on state issued phones the country-wide ban would likely be far more difficult to implement. As would a sale. An article in the NY Times on March 17 opined that few American companies are likely to be interested. That same day, CBS news reported that the Justice Department is investigating ByteDance, TikTok’s Chinese parent company, for possible spying on U.S. citizens.
Even if TikTok could find a buyer, forcing a sale would hardly protect America’s data, which is widely available for purchase. According to the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC.org), the information collected and sold by data brokers includes our income, political preferences, children, purchases, health, online activities, and, thanks to smart phones, our location. Sale of this information is not restricted to the US, or even companies based in the US.
Data on the military is also available for a price. In an article entitled “Data Brokers Are a Threat to National Security”, Captain Steven J. Arango, of the U.S. Marine Corps writes that “China, Russia, and Iran can go directly to data brokers to purchase information about service members and veterans or, if that fails, they can just steal it.” He notes the ubiquity of hacking, including a Chines hack of Equifax that revealed sensitive information on an estimated half of all Americans.
“Data’, he says, “allows these countries to track service members’ movements, impersonate personnel online or in email, and identify personnel working on specific tasks within the military.” So the security dangers Tik Tok presents may be no worse than other platforms. But advocates for children and adolescents are also seeking major changes at Tik Tok and other platforms which they say are necessary to alleviate the dangers posed by algorithims and viral challenges that can cause injury, illness and in some cases death.
According to Josh Golin, executive director of Fairplay For Kids, “TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube’s profit-seeking algorithms expose millions of children and teens to risky content that they are encouraged to imitate,” One example he cited was the case of a 15 year-old boy who died after attempting the so-called “Choking Challenge” Fairplay is part of a coalition of children’s advocacy groups urging Congress to pass the Kids Online Safety Act (S. 3663). The bill, authored by Senators Richard Blumenthal and Marsha Blackburn, passed the Senate Commerce Committee easily, but has not yet been scheduled for a floor vote.
It includes requirements that platforms allow minors to disable addictive features, protect their information and opt out of algorithmic recommendations, and requires mitigation of the “promotion of self-harm, suicide, eating disorders, substance abuse, sexual exploitation, and unlawful products for minors.” Both it and a California law that demands changes to online platforms serving children are virulently opposed by the tech industry.
Governor Gavin Newsome signed California’s Appropriate Design Code Act, in 2022. It restricts data collection by internet companies that serve children and requires that they design their platforms with children’s “well-being” in mind. The tech industry is challenging that measure in court, and fighting efforts to replicate it currently taking place in Maryland, Minnesota and elsewhere.
“This is an absolute virus spreading across the country… to create new rules on how Americans and their families engage online,” whined Carl Szabo, vice president and general counsel of NetChoice, a big tech lobbying organization, in an interview. NetChoice’s members include Google, Meta, Twitter, and yes, Chinese-owned TikTok as well.
Photo taken from: nbcnews.com
The lobbying blitz will be hard for advocates to counter, according to Nicole Gill of Accountable Tech. Accountable Tech is part of a coalition backing the age-appropriate design bills similar to California’s that also includes Parents Together and Design It For Us “It’s certainly not a fair fight,” said Gill, noting the industry’s ample resources.
Advocates insist the law is needed to better protect children from harmful online content and to block features like Autoplay that encourage youth to spend hours online. They also want default privacy settings configured to the highest possible level and restrictions on the collection and sale of children’s data.
The San Mateo County Board of Education isn’t waiting for the California law to go into effect in 2024. It is suing some of the biggest names in social media, claiming TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube and others create a “destructive environment for children,” leaving parents and educators to deal with a growing crisis in childhood mental health.
With all of this TikTok’s CEO Shou Zi Chew will be on the hot seat during his scheduled testimony to the House of representatives on March 23. The committee has said the hearing will focus on TikTok’s “consumer privacy and data security practices, how the platform affects children, and its relationship with the Chinese Communist Party.”
Follow us for the latest U.S. RESIST News!
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Dared by the Algorithm: Dangerous Challenges Are Just a Click Away
California’s New Child Privacy Law Could Become National Standard
Dominion Voting Machines and Its Case Against Fox
Dominion Voting Machines and Its Case Against Fox
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #70 | By: Maureen Darby-Serson | March 20, 2023
Header photo taken from: poynter.org
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Dominion, known publicly for the use of their voting machines during the 2020 election, sued Fox news for defamation in court, with some documents being made public this past month. These recently released documents revealed that Fox News knew that the 2020 election was not stolen and still openly reported that President Joe Biden had not been the real winner of the election. Fox News reported that there was widespread voter fraud in public while, behind closed doors, acknowledged to colleagues that they were not aware of any legitimate evidence of such.
The $1.6 billion lawsuit brings up many questions. Why is Dominion suing? Does the first amendment cover Fox News? What will happen if this case goes to trial?
Photo taken from:
apnews.com
Policy Analysis
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Dominion, a popular voting machine manufacture, is suing Fox News for defamation, stating that Fox published at least four statements that they knew were not true regarding the company. According to court fillings, the four statements are as follows:
- Dominion committed election fraud by rigging the 2020 Presidential Election.
- Dominion’s software and algorithms manipulated vote counts in the 2020 Presidential Election.
- Dominion is owned by a company founded in Venezuela to rig elections for the dictator Hugo Chavez.
- Dominion paid kickbacks to government officials who used its machines in the 2020 Presidential Election.
Photo taken from: cnbc.com / Alexi Rosenfeld / Getty Images
Dominion claims that, despite publishing all the above, Fox News knew that all these statements were not true. In addition, they claim that, despite all the evidence government officials released showing that Dominion voting machines were effective and not faulty, Fox News spread lies and conspiracies to steal the 2020 Presidential election. This, in turn, hurt their company and its name. Fox News argues that their reporting is covered under the first amendment protection of free speech and freedom of the press.
The first amendment under the U.S. Constitution does protect free speech and freedom of the press. The issue with this case is that the Constitution protects the press when they make good faith mistakes in reporting, it does not protect them against reporting news which they know is not true. The court filling recently made public shows that Fox News employees knew that they were reporting false claims but still reported it as fact anyways. This shows that it was not a good faith mistake, and would cause major issues for Fox News if the case ever went to trial. A jury would have to find that Fox News made a good faith mistake in reporting to be covered under the first amendment. This is unlikely after the release of the various text messages, emails, and statements by Fox executives this past month.
Follow us for the latest U.S. RESIST News!
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Why Fox News’ lies about Trump’s defeat probably aren’t protected by the 1st Amendment
The Whole Thing Seems Insane’: New Documents on Fox and the Election