JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
Supreme Court Rejects Independent State Legislature Doctrine in Moore v. Harper
Brief #206 – Civil Rights Policy Brief
by Rodney A. Maggay
Under this interpretation, there could be several different scenarios where the doctrine could be used to try and undermine a U.S. election.
The Path to U.S. Immigration Reform: Addressing the Challenges and Opportunities in a Globalized World
Brief #147 – Social Justice Policy Brief
by Inijah Quadri
The current U.S. immigration system is widely criticized as being outdated and ineffective, often failing to address economic needs, family reunification, refugee…
Medicare for All: Assessing the Potential for Universal Healthcare in the United States
Brief #80 – Health & Gender Policy Brief
by Inijah Quadri
The current system relies heavily on private insurance, often provided through employers, creating disparities in access and coverage.
Saudi Arabia’s Buys Into Sports as an Image Builder
Brief #83 – Foreign Policy Brief
by Reilly Fitzgerald
Saudi Arabia is attempting to invest in areas that will allow them to maintain their financial status in the world, after the planet has moved away from fossil fuels and oil.
The Ukraine Crisis: Situation Update #24
Brief #82 – Foreign Policy Brief
by Abran C
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.
“March for Justice” in Russia Broke Illusion of Putin’s Power
Brief #81 – Foreign Policy Brief
by Yelena Korshunov
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.
The Republican Presidential Candidates Positions on Education and Immigration
Brief #83 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by Abigail Hunt
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…
Google Profits from Barriers to Abortion Access
Brief #91 – Technology Policy Brief
by Mindy Spatt
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.
Indicted Again: Breaking Down the Classified Documents Case Against Donald Trump
Brief #82 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by Arvind Salem
On June 8, 2023, Donald Trump became the first president in history to face federal criminal charges.
Important Elections in the First Half of 2023: Municipal Elections
Important Elections in the First Half of 2023: Municipal Elections
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #65 | By: Ian Milden | March 20, 2023
Header photo taken from: lac.org
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
In this brief, I discuss the importance of municipal elections in public policy. Specifically, I focus on the election for mayor of Chicago, where the two candidates have significantly divergent ideas on how to improve public safety. I also provide some updates on elections I discussed in a previous brief.
Photo taken from:
Chicago Tribune/Armando L. Sanchez/Tribune News Service via Getty Images
Policy Analysis
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
While the year before a Presidential election doesn’t often feature major federal elections, many local offices are up for election this year. Municipal officeholders have the power to shape policy on issues such as transportation, infrastructure, housing, public safety, and other government services. Some of the cities that are holding municipal elections in 2023 include Philadelphia, Houston, Chicago, Charlotte, Denver, Indianapolis, Kansas City, Columbus, Memphis, Nashville, Dallas, San Antonio, and Salt Lake City. The race for Mayor of Chicago is an example of a race where the winner could significantly reshape policy on public safety.
Chicago held municipal primaries on February 28th. In the primary, incumbent Mayor Lori Lightfoot was not successful in advancing to the general election. Instead, the non-partisan runoff on April 4th will be contested by former Chicago Public Schools superintendent Paul Vallas and Cook County Commissioner Brandon Johnson. Nearly half of the voters who participated in the primary voted for a candidate who did not make the general election, so this race is wide open.
Vallas and Johnson have significant differences in their policy views on the police department and public safety. Vallas has campaigned for funding to hire hundreds of additional police officers, as well as investments in new facilities for the police department such as a forensic lab. This position has won him the endorsement of the city’s police union. Vallas has made these positions the central focus of his campaign.
Brandon Johnson’s position on reducing crime is different. Johnson’s campaign argues that investments in social services and other core needs like affordable housing and mental health services will help reduce crime by addressing the root causes of crime. Johnson’s campaign argues that his approach should be tried since previous increases in crime rates have been responded to by hiring additional police officers, and that has not worked well for many neighborhoods.
While the policy positions of the candidates are important, voter perceptions of the candidates may affect the outcome as well. Johnson has attacked Vallas as too conservative for Chicago, while Vallas’ campaign is trying to depict Johnson as someone who holds views that are consistent with socialism.
Regardless of who wins the election, the new mayor will have to convince the city council to approve their policy proposals. If you want to know if your municipality is holding elections for local offices, check the websites of your state or municipal board of elections. In jurisdictions where the filing deadline has passed for candidates, a sample ballot should be available.
Photo taken from: CNN
An Update on the Wisconsin State Supreme Court Race
Janet Protasiewicz and Dan Kelly advanced to the April 4th general election for the open seat on the Wisconsin State Supreme Court. Judge Protasiewicz received the most votes. Overall, the liberal leaning justices had 54% of the vote, which is a positive sign for Judge Protasiewicz’s chances. An analysis of Washington State’s top two election system found that the partisan vote distribution in the primary closely mirrored the results of the general election when the general election featured a Democrat and a Republican. While the trends from the analysis of Washington State’s election are a positive sign for Wisconsin Democrats, they may not hold due to the unusual timing of the election and lower voter turnout rates for elections that occur at unusual times.
Updates on Congressional Special Elections
Jennifer McClellan was elected to fill the vacancy in Virginia’s 4th Congressional District. McClellan got a higher percentage of votes, 74.29%, than recent Democratic performances in the district. While McClellan’s election fills the last vacancy in the House of Representatives, a new vacancy is expected this summer because Rep David Cicilline of Rhode Island announced plans to resign on June 1st to take a job at a non-profit organization. Cicilline’s district is a strongly Democratic district, so Democrats should expect to retain the seat. Governor Dan McKee (D-RI) will not be able to set a date for the special election until after Cicilline leaves office. A special election will likely occur in the late summer or early fall.
Follow us for the latest U.S. RESIST News!
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
The Diversification of US Soccer
The Diversification of US Soccer
Foreign Policy Brief #176 | By: Reilly Fitzgerald | March 15, 2023
Header photo taken from: Los Angeles Times / Jeff Zelevansky / Getty Images
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Football, or soccer as we Americans often refer to it, is one of the most diverse sports in the world. It is played on every continent, except for Antarctica, and is played in every country in the world by people of all ages, races, genders, abilities, etc. It is often called The Beautiful Game, and it truly is beautiful. It is remarkable to look at the composition of some professional teams and look at the different skin tones that are represented, the different countries represented, the amount of languages that can be spoken on a team, and to consider all of the complexities that those conditions may bring with them.
The American professional soccer league, Major League Soccer (MLS) has a reputation among soccer fans as a growing league. It has even attracted some top stars from around the world, even if some were eyeing retirement shortly after arriving, such as David Beckham, Robbie Keane, Zlatan Ibrahimovic, Gareth Bale, Steven Gerrard, and Wayne Rooney. Many of the biggest signings to come to the United States to play have been European players. However, the American soccer story begins before the MLS with the league called the North American Soccer League (NASL), which started in the 1960s and died out by the mid-80s – but, this league set the American soccer leagues up to be among the most diverse in the world.
Photo taken from:
Yahoo / AP Photo / Kirsty Wigglesworth
Policy Analysis
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The North American Soccer League was a league developed in the mid-1960s and lasted until the mid-1980s. It was a VERY poor league when it started, in every sense of the word. It did not have a lot of money, as soccer was not a major athletic interest in the United States (even though it was being played in Europe and around the world since the late 1800s). The quality of play in the sport was severely lacking, so much so that the immigrant communities in the US were not interested at all, according to an article from The Conversation. Also, European players who attempted to come and play in the United States were quickly frustrated and didn’t even consider it to be the same sport as European football. To address this lack of talent, and quality, the NASL decided to try and tempt high quality players from under-represented countries in football world to come to the United States to play.
The NASL began to attract players from Africa, and immigrants from Africa already in the United States, to play professionally. Africans, and many other minorities, were not particularly welcome in Europe’s top leagues and had many reasons to leave their continent. This was especially true in South Africa, where the Apartheid policies were causing blacks to be excluded from local leagues.The NASL also began to attract top quality talent from South America, such as the Brazilian player Pélé (arguably the greatest player in history) who signed with the New York Cosmos.
This new injection of quality and skill soon brought over European players such as Beckenbauer, George Best, and Johann Cruyff; each legends for their former clubs and their national teams. While the US, politically, was dealing with the Civil Rights Movement and attempting to address racial inequalities, it was becoming one of the most tolerant and diverse leagues in the world of soccer. Today, Major League Soccer (MLS) is the most diverse sports league in North America (and one of the most diverse soccer leagues in the world). According to an article in The Conversation, there are 82 countries represented by players in this league.
Photo taken from: Los Angeles Times / Jeff Zelevansky / Getty Images
Unfortunately, this story changes a bit when we start to look at the national teams, and in particular the United States Women’s National Team (USWNT), which is one of the most successful national teams in history with multiple World Cup wins, Olympic medals, and some truly amazing star players like Alex Morgan and Megan Rapinoe. The USWNT, according to an article by NPR, is one of the least diverse national teams in the world. In their last World Cup, the United States had a total of five players of color on a 23 woman roster; for comparison purposes, the article states, that France had a total of 12 (half the roster). NPR also interviewed Crystal Dunn, a player on the USWNT, and she reported that during the 2019 World Cup the team did not have a stylist who was familiar in working with Black hair, and she was required to attend media events as part of being on the team.
The biggest barrier to getting women and men into this sport (and to grow the sport in general) is the idea of “pay to play” sports. Rich families are able to outspend families from disadvantaged and marginalized communities. US Soccer’s Cindy Parlow Cone referred to soccer as a “rich, White kids’ sport” as she is working on ways to increase diversity and inclusion of all players, regardless of background. Sports in the United States, in general, can cost thousands of dollars per year – and if the kid is skilled enough to go onward, then the costs can really start to rake up when you account for travel teams, the travel to matches, the equipment, the coaching, summer camps, etc. Very quickly, youths from disadvantaged communities are left behind – regardless of their skill on the ball; and this seems to be holding true, across genders.
Desmond Armstrong, according to the New York Times, was the first Black player to play in a World Cup for the United States (after not having qualified for a World Cup for 40 years), alongside the substitute player Jimmy Banks (came on later in the match); and he states that the United States Men’s team is finally starting to have an increase in diversity. The US Men’s National Team (USMNT) roster is the most diverse it has ever been. There are players that are White, Black, and Latino that represented at the last World Cup in Qatar in December 2022; and they are captained by a Black player named Tyler Adams, who also plays in the English Premier League, the top league in the world.
The trajectory for US Soccer, on the topic of diversity, is a positive one – it seems. There are now programs aiming to address access to the sport at a grassroots level. US Soccer’s Soccer for Success program has impacted over 400,000 children, overwhelmingly from communities of color, according to NPR; which also reported that the number of non-white female players has increased from 24% in NCAA Division I, ten years ago, to 34% now. So, growth and inclusion has been going in a positive direction.
Follow us for the latest U.S. RESIST News!
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Department of Labor Rescinds Religious Exemption Rule Used To Discriminate
Department of Labor Rescinds Religious Exemption Rule Used To Discriminate
Civil Rights Policy Brief #202 | By: Rodney A. Maggay | March 7, 2023
Header photo taken from: house.gov
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more civil rights policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Reuters / Evelyn Hockstein
Policy Summary
In 2019, the Trump Administration proposed a Department of Labor (DOL) rule that expanded the interpretation of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 as applied to employees of federal contractors. This rule is popularly known as the “Implementing Legal Requirements Regarding the Equal Opportunity Clause’s Religious Exemption.” When the agency rule was finally enacted on January 8, 2021 the rule permitted federal contractors to not hire or fire employees if there was a conflict with the federal contractor’s religious beliefs. A federal contractor could now openly discriminate against an employee based on his sexual orientation, gender identity or different religious belief and point to his own religion or belief as justification for his action against the employee.
On February 28, 2023, DOL announced that the Trump Administration – era rule will be rescinded. The rule was published in the Federal Register on March 1, 2023. With the rescission of the rule, the previous policy of the department regarding the interpretation and implementation of the religious exemption rule will fall back to the prior application of Executive Order 11246 in effect under the presidencies of George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Under that executive order, federal contractors are barred from discriminating on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or national origin.
The original religious exemption that allows religious corporations, associations and societies will remain (e.g. allowing certain religious schools to hire teachers with similar religious beliefs). Except now the exemption is no longer so broad as to allow any group to claim the ability to discriminate on the basis of their religious beliefs without thoroughly scrutinizing their claim of a religious belief exemption. Now, each claim invoking the religious exemption will be reviewed on a case – by – case basis to determine if the claim of exemption is valid. LEARN MORE 1, LEARN MORE 2
Policy Analysis
The rescission of the Department of Labor rule proposed and implemented during the Trump Administration reflects the ongoing struggle in how to handle discrimination based on religious beliefs cases. Until a legal framework is implemented it seems likely that the pendulum will swing back and forth – at one moment favoring those who are arguing for religious liberty and then swinging back the other way to favor those whose civil rights and liberties are being infringed in the name of religious beliefs.
What was unique about the rescission of the Trump Administration era rule was that it did not add, delete or modify any language found in Executive Order 11246. That executive order, since 2003, has been interpreted to permit a limited religious exemption which is modeled on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Those who wished to invoke the exemption to engage in a discriminatory action were reviewed on a case – by – case basis in accordance with cases and statutes interpreting Title VII. In practice, the Executive Order provided that federal contractors receiving federal taxpayer funds could not discriminate on the basis of race, color or religion and other protected categories. This was the prevailing practice under the Bush and Obama Administrations.
However, when the Trump Administration era recission rule was introduced it expanded the scope of the original rule to such an extent that it caused an uproar when it was finalized. The agency received more than 5,000 comments to rescind the agency rule. Comments from Members of Congress, labor unions, and civil liberties organizations focused on Trump’s removal of non – discrimination protections as a major reason why they wanted President Biden to support rescission of the agency rule. Groups argued that when the Trump rule was introduced it allowed just about anyone to use their religious beliefs as a justification to keep out employees based on their sexual orientation or gender identity even though the federal contractors were receiving federal dollars.
And on a larger scale, if the rule continued it would allow just about any federal contractor to opt out of any federal rules they disagree with and simply claim “religious beliefs” without any legitimate scrutiny of their claims. Instead of giving potential federal contractors a home – made excuse to discriminate as they please with no limitations or restrictions, the groups wanted a return to the previous practice. If a contractor claimed a “religious exemption” to discriminate then their claim would be measured on prior case law to determine if their claim has any merit based on prior law.
Luckily, the DOL agreed and decided to rescind the Trump era rule and return to the prior practice. This action represents a win for those who do not believe that another person’s religion should allow those people to discriminate or deprive another of their civil rights on the basis of their religious beliefs. But it also demonstrates that the fight will be ongoing against those who would try to use their religion to justify discriminating or depriving others of basic rights guaranteed to them. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE
This brief was compiled by Rod Maggay. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief, please contact rodwood@email.com.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Freedom From Religion Foundation – press release from non – profit group applauding rescission of agency rule regarding discrimination protections for federal contractor employees.
Americans United For The Separation of Church and State – press release from non – profit group celebrating rescission of agency rule regarding discrimination protections for federal contractor employees.
The Week That Was #5
The Week That Was #5
Foreign Policy Brief #175 | By: Abran C | March 14, 2023
Header photo taken from: The Guardian
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more foreign policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: China Daily / Reuters
A new series to catch you up on the top stories that occurred around the world last week.
China- Iran & Saudi Arabia Deal
Last week Beijing brokered a deal to restore diplomatic relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia, signaling a shift in the politics of the Middle East region and global diplomacy. Diplomatic relations between the two countries were cut in 2016 after Saudi Arabia executed a prominent Shia cleric, angering many in Iran. This cut in relations came after decades of animosity between the two countries.
After the signing of the new deal mediated by China, Saudi and Iranian officials have said they will also work to reimplement a decades-old security cooperation pact and revive agreements on technology, and trade. The two regional powers have been at odds for years with hostility directed at one another through indirect conflicts such as the war in Yemen where Saudi forces fought Iran-backed Houthi rebels.
The talks between Iran and Saudi Arabia were occurring at the same time that negotiations between Iran and the United States to revive the Iran nuclear deal were faltering. The new deal is an indicator of China’s growing influence in the Middle-East, as well as its growing role internationally as a mediator and global power. While the deal is a positive development for peace and security in the region, it demonstrates that China’s standing globally has risen, and the US has lost the confidence of many countries in the region.
Georgia’s Foreign Agent Law
Thousands of people took to the streets of Georgias capital Tbilisi last week to protest a controverial draft law proposed by the country’s congress. The proposed law “On Transparency of Foreign Influence” would target organisations such as media outlets and NGO’s that receive over 20% of funding from abroad, stating they would be classified as foreign agents.
Many in the country said the law if passed would stifle press freedom in Georgia, where a large portion of the media is already controlled by the government. The law was dubbed the new “Russian law” because of its similarities to a 2012 law in Russia that was used to crack down on non-state funded NGOs and media.
Those who opposed the new law, said it would not only limit press freedom but would also undercut Georgia’s efforts to become a candidate for EU membership. Georgia applied for EU membership in March 2022, only a week after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
The EU, however, rejected its application and approved the candidacies of Ukraine and Moldova. The rejection was widely seen as a consequence of democratic backsliding under the leadership of the Georgian Dream party.
Photo taken from: Agenda.GE
(click or tap to enlargen)
Much of the fury against the proposed law, that has since been struck down, was aimed at Georgian Dream’s founder, Bidzina Ivanishvili, a billionaire who made his fortune in Russia and reportedly continues to have close ties to the Kremlin.
There is widespread distrust of Russia in the country. In 2008, the Kremlin sent forces into Georgia to support two Russian-backed breakaway regions and Moscow continues to keep its troops there, giving them de facto control of 20% of Georgia’s territory.
Israel Protests
Israelis continue weeks of protest against plans by Benjamin Netanyahu’s far right government to “reform” the country’s judicial system. For ten weeks now hundreds of thousands of Israelis have taken to the streets of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem to voice opposition to the reform which many see as authoritarian. The reforms would weaken the country’s courts and erode the judiciary’s ability to check the power of the country’s other branches of government and increase the powers of the Prime minister.
The legislation, if passed would give Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, the power to overrule the country’s Supreme Court rulings with a simple majority. The law would also allow the ruling far right government to continue legalizing further expansion into the occupied territories, something which the US has expressed concern over. US Secretary of DefenseLoyd Austin last week during a visit to Israel that was cut short due to the protests that called for “a halt in unilateral actions that undermine the US’ enduring goal of two states”. The Netanyahu administration has made no indication that it plans to reverse the proposed reforms.
The Ethical Dilemma of A.I. and Mental Health
The Ethical Dilemma of A.I. and Mental Health
Health and Gender Policy Brief #158 | By: Geoffrey Small | March 10, 2023
Header photo taken from: APA.org
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more health and gender policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Shutterstock
Policy Summary
The United States continues to fall short in providing basic healthcare necessities that other high-income nations provide globally. The proportionally low quality healthcare system in the U.S is compounded by a growing mental health crisis in a post-pandemic society, where demand for psychological help is higher than ever. With increasing demand, a shortage of mental health professionals make accessibility for individuals in need even more daunting. U.S. companies are trying to find innovative solutions to this shortage by turning to A.I (artificial intelligence).
However, as mental-health companies are taking the initiative to help with this shortage of accessibility in a time of crisis, there is a debate in the healthcare community about tech companies ethical practices. This policy Brief will explore the use of A.I. to address the national shortage of mental healthcare and the concerns that public health and tech professionals have about the ethics of introducing A.I. without protocols that the scientific community has used since the Tuskegee Study.
Policy Analysis
According to the Commonwealth Fund, U.S. citizens experience the worst overall health outcomes of any other high-income nation. People in the U.S. are more likely to die younger from avoidable causes than peer countries. Health care spending for a person in the U.S. is significantly more than any other high-income nations. Americans see health care professionals, like physicians and psychologists, far less than citizens in other countries. This comes at a time where the World Health Organization has reported a 25% increase in anxiety and depression worldwide, which is directly related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Business insider recently profiled a nonprofit mental health company’s solution to this growing crisis in accessibility. Rob Morris, the cofounder of Koko, tweeted that his company used GBT-3, chatbots to help develop responses for 4,000 users who were in need of mental health-related support. Morris claims that the experiment was “exempt” from informed consent laws due to the nature of the test.
Even though he indicated that humans were supervising A.I. responses, the experiment did not work when people later learned a machine was involved in their online conversations. Morris later followed up his tweet clarifying that people were not paired with chatbots without their knowledge, once his previous tweets drew the ire of public health and tech professionals.
Some public health and tech professionals claimed that this method violated informed consent laws. The HHS (Department of Health and Human Services) clearly states that “legally effective informed consent of individuals before involving them in research is one of the central protections provided.”
Infographic taken from: Frontiers (.org)
(click or tap to enlargen)
A full understanding of the information needs to be disclosed in order for the participant to make informed decisions. These guidelines were formulated after the 1979 Belmont Report, published by a Federal commission that investigated the Tuskegee Study, where African Americans were clinically observed for long-term effects of syphilis without treating the individuals.
After criticism from the public health community, Morris stated that the A.I. program was discontinued in January. Innovative methods may be needed to address the growing U.S. mental health crisis, but the tech industry needs to be aware of informed consent laws when exposing participants to Artificial Intelligence.
Data and advocacy from organizations like The National Alliance of Mental Illness and Mental Health America are conducted with ethical best practices. That is why it’s important to donate to these organizations to better understand the repercussions A.I. chatbots may have on willing participants with mental health issues.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
A Third of the Population Continue to Cook our Planet
A Third of the Population Continue to Cook our Planet
Environment Policy Brief #153 | By: Todd J Broadman | March 13, 2023
Header photo taken from: iStockphoto
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more enviornmental policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Reuters / Danish Siddiqui
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The methods that many humans apply to cooking their food are proving to have a substantial effect on our environment and health. About 2.4 billion people cook food using a “dirty” biomass method of cooking which uses wood, animal dung, and charcoal fire pits or kerosene stoves. There are two long-term impacts of this approach: the last of our forests are depleted, and the fumes contribute 2% of global greenhouse gas emissions, or the annual equivalent of 1.3 billion tons of carbon dioxide. In quantity, this ranks alongside the burning of jet fuel for planes.
There are also the human health effects. The use of charcoal gives off particulate matter and soot contributing to widespread illness and an estimated 3.8 million premature deaths. Families that rely on firewood must spend many hours each week collecting it; time that prevents women from more gainful employment and children from their education. Then there is the risk – when gathering wood in remote areas – of violence to women and children.
One alternative to “dirty” cooking is the use of electricity. “Over these years, we’ve come to the conclusion that the really big potential game changer—indeed, we think it is far more than ‘potential’—is electricity,” explains Research Director, Ed Brown, of Modern Energy Cooking Services. But cleaner fuels like electricity are being deployed slowly and not at the rate required. Between 2010 and 2020, an estimated 1.3 billion people were added to the electric grid. Asia has made more progress than other regions.
Another relatively clean alternative is liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and related stove technologies. Yet even here we see a usage increase of only 1% per year from 2010-2019, and it is confined to limited regions within Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, and Pakistan.
Policy Analysis
There is a need for coordinated solutions. Otherwise, efforts to replenish degraded forests will prove futile if communities near to those forests depend on biomass for their cooking. Instances in which the rate of wood collection outstrips the regrowth rate of forests are common. The need is most acute in sub-Saharan Africa where only 10% of the population has access to clean cooking alternatives; in East Asia that number is 36%, and in Latin America and the Caribbean, 56%.
There are cultural obstacles as well. In families where men are the decision makers, they often opt not to use clean cookstoves for financial reasons, in spite of the fact that women and children are most impacted. Firewood and animal dung arrive with no hard dollar cost, only the time and labor of those tasked with obtaining it. In addition, many countries subsidize the cost of kerosene fuel.
When India embarked on a massive rural effort to distribute millions of LPG cylinders for cooking, they discovered that less than 20% of families could afford to refill those cylinders and over half of recipients defaulted back to using biomass fuels.
A similar project to provide villages with electric power for cooking largely failed due to residents being unable to afford the cost of electricity as well as the instability of the power grid.
Photo taken from: Unicef
(click or tap to enlargen)
The World Bank has established a clean cooking loan program with $350 million dollars that targets projects in 21 countries, helping over 3.6 million households. The money makes it possible for some families to afford stoves and other equipment. Countries include: Bangladesh, China, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Kenya, Lao PDR, Madagascar, Mongolia, Rwanda, and Uganda.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
https://cleancooking.org/ works with a global network of partners to build an inclusive industry that can make clean cooking accessible to all.
https://www.esmap.org/clean-cooking-fund a clean cooking fund that aims to scale up public and private investments by co-financing with Multi-lateral Development Bank’s lending operations, catalyzing technology and business innovation, and linking incentives with verified results.
https://www.theearthandi.org/ educates readers on how to best restore our unique role as loving stewards of the natural world.
Facing the Dubious Paradigm of School Shooting Responses
Facing the Dubious Paradigm of School Shooting Responses
Education Policy Brief #61 | By: Steve Piazza | March 7, 2023
Header photo taken from: Giffords Courage to Fight Gun Violence
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more education policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Jewel Samad / Getty Images
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
In response to a spate of shooting incidents in schools over the last several decades, state and local governments have attempted a number of ways to keep students safe.
At the federal level, The STOP School Violence Act (2018) has awarded hundreds of millions of dollars in grants, and will provide funding to schools through 2028. Congress has also introduced several other violence prevention bills, like H.R.5428 (2021) and S.4968 (2022), but to date, none have seen much additional substantive action beyond introduction.
Meanwhile, more than 40 states have taken action and do require some sort of preparation for a violent threat. As a result, 95% of K-12 schools across the country currently have active shooter drills.
Policy Analysis
Since American public schools first came into existence almost 200 years ago, safety for students and teachers have been a concern and preventive practices have evolved. Tragic incidents like the fatal fires at the Lake View School in Collinwood, Ohio (1908) and Chicago’s Our Lady of the Angels School (1958) resulted not only in structural changes around school buildings but in fire drills that have been refined and become part of a school’s routine on the calendar.
During the 1950’s and 60’s as Cold War threats of nuclear attack were looming, students were subject to readiness sessions that had them climbing underneath desks and placing their heads between their knees. In time, these drills went out of fashion, but similar severe weather drills are still not uncommon, especially in many places that are prone to tornadoes.
And now, with the amount of gun violence that’s been plaguing schools for several decades, we find we have entered a new era defining safety in schools. In 1994, Congress passed the Gun Free Schools Act that required expulsion for public school students caught carrying a weapon in school, though many believed it didn’t go far enough.
Shooting after shooting continued and following each tragedy, renewed calls for solutions to prevent more violence emerged. These include passing stricter gun laws, arming teachers, increasing the number of police officers on campus, implementing red flag alert protocols to identify students or others in the community who may pose a potential threat, and so on. Yet without fail, debates about law and policy would immediately become highly politicized and the already deepening divide would result in continued inaction.
This began to change somewhat in 2018 when, following the shooting deaths of 17 at Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, Congress was able to pass the STOP Act, though only after making it part of an omnibus bill. Soon after, other steps outside Congress were taken.
Infographic taken from: Everytown Research (.org)
(click or tap to enlargen)
The Homeland Security Department now has resources in place that pertain to school and workplace violence, resources that include threat assessments and mitigations. Some colleges, like St. Mary’s College of Maryland, promote certain protocols, like Run Hide, Fight, if an active shooter is present. Washington state’s Department of Education has published a guide for emergencies.
As active shooter drills have become ubiquitous, many feel that using certain extreme drills takes its toll on who they’re attempting to protect: students. Controversial programs like Alert, Lockdown, Inform, Counter and Evacuate (ALICE) that use realistic role playing have caused authorities to be concerned about the harm they actually cause to students.
Opposition to such drills has been supported by research. For example, the Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund (Everytown) collaborated on a report with the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and the National Education Association (NEA).
The report concluded that there’s no evidence active shooter drills are effective in preventing incidents or assuring safety. However, it did reveal significant increases in emotional issues, such as depression, stress, and anxiety, as well as physiological health problems for many.
Politicians have taken notice of these dangers. In 2020, Washington Democratic Governor Jay Inslee signed a law requiring that any preventive measures cannot cause developmental or emotional harm. In June 2021, Governor Greg Abbott of Texas approved SB 168, which calls for amongst other things, the “creation of a safe zone around the exercise area to exclude weapons, subject to certain exceptions.”
The law also includes notification of parents and requires the use of drills deemed age and developmentally appropriate. Even the 2018 Final Report of the Federal Commission on School Safety, is now, despite its title, under revision by the Biden Administration.
Regardless of what’s been done so far, there’s still a long way to go. We can no longer ignore that implementing effectual and tenacious violence prevention measures beyond controversial drills is the imperative. For the time being, though, contentious preparation activities remain a grim reality in almost all the nations’ schools. Too bad that students’ vulnerability to violence does as well.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
The National Child Traumatic Stress Network has developed a checklist that is sympathetic to the emotional and psychological needs of students during active shooter drills: https://www.nctsn.org/resources/creating-school-active-shooter-intruder-drills
Organizations like The Sandy Hook Promise Fund offers resources on school safety as well as additional information on how schools can apply for the STOP grant: https://actionfund.sandyhookpromise.org/
For another example of research on the effects of active shooter drills, this one published by the Criminal Justice Policy Review, click the following: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0887403419900316
Four Ways to Improve the United Nations
Four Ways to Improve the United Nations
Foreign Policy Brief #174 | By: Inijah Quadri | February 22, 2023
Header photo taken from: epthinkthank.eu
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more foreign policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: United Nations Peacekeeping (.org)
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The United Nations (UN) was established in 1945 with the aim of promoting international cooperation, peace, and security. Over the years the organization has evolved, taking on new roles and addressing new challenges. However, the UN is not without its shortcomings, and there have been calls for reform and improvement. In this article, we will explore some of the ways in which the UN could be improved.
Policy Analysis
1. Strengthening the Security Council
The Security Council is responsible for maintaining international peace and security. It is composed of five permanent members (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States) and ten non-permanent members, elected for two-year terms.
The permanent members have veto power, which can be used to block any substantive resolution. This has led to criticism that the Security Council is undemocratic and unrepresentative.
To improve the Security Council there should be an increase in the number of permanent members to make it more representative of the world’s population, and to give more countries a say in global decision-making. There also a reform to the veto power, for example by limiting its use to issues that directly affect the national security of the veto-wielding state.
2. Reforming the General Assembly
The General Assembly is the main deliberative body of the UN, where all member states have equal representation. However, it is often criticized as being too large and unwieldy, and its decisions are not legally binding. The General Assembly currently has 193 member states, with a range in population size from Nauru (around 10,000) to China (over 1 billion).
To make the General Assembly more effective there have been proposals to reduce its size and give it more authority. This could involve reducing the number of member states represented in the General Assembly or establishing a smaller body made up of representatives from different regions, with each region having an equal number of representatives.
The selection of countries for each region and the number of countries in each region would likely be decided through negotiations among member states, possibly through a process similar to the current system of regional groups within the UN. Such a body could be more efficient and effective in making decisions than the current General Assembly.
<< Top 5 nations / permanent UN members by number of vetoes issued against resolutions.
Chart taken from: The UN
(click or tap to enlargen)
3. Strengthening the UN’s Peacekeeping Operations
Peacekeeping is one of the core functions of the UN, and the organization has deployed peacekeeping missions to many conflict zones around the world. However, some peacekeeping operations have faced criticism for being underfunded, understaffed, and lacking in resources. To improve peacekeeping, we hope to see more proposals to increase funding and resources for peacekeeping operations, as well as to improve the training and preparation of peacekeepers. The current budget for UN peacekeeping operations is approximately $6.5 billion, and there are currently 12 active peacekeeping missions around the world. The types of missions range from helping to maintain a ceasefire to supporting political processes and protecting civilians.
In addition, incidents of abuse committed by peacekeepers, such as sexual exploitation of civilians, continue to tarnish the reputation of UN peacekeeping missions. These incidents are often underreported, and even when reported, the perpetrators often go unpunished. More needs to be done to ensure that perpetrators are held accountable for their actions and that victims receive justice and support. Examples of incidents of abuse committed by peacekeepers include cases of sexual exploitation and abuse in the Central African Republic and Haiti.
– Working with the Taliban on Afghanistan’s Recovery
– Solidifying Yemen’s Truce
– Restoring Trust in UN Peacekeeping in the DR Congo
– Fighting Corruption and Impunity in Honduras
– Keeping Aid Flowing to Syria’s North West
– Getting Aid to Civilians in Russian-occupied Areas of Ukraine
– Drafting a “New Agenda for Peace”
– Channelling UN Funding to AU Operations
– Advancing the Climate Security Agenda in the Security Council
Photo taken from: International Crisis Group
4. Addressing Human Rights Abuses
The UN has a responsibility to promote and protect human rights around the world. However, it has been criticized for not doing enough to address human rights abuses in countries such as China, Russia, and Saudi Arabia.
The Commission on Human Rights, which was the main UN body responsible for promoting and protecting human rights until it was replaced by the Human Rights Council in 2006, had several limitations that hindered its effectiveness. One of the most significant limitations was its membership, which was composed of member states elected by the UN General Assembly. The process of selecting members often resulted in countries with poor human rights records being elected to the Commission, which raised questions about the body’s credibility and independence. Examples of countries with poor human rights records that have sat on the Commission on Human Rights in the past include China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, and Zimbabwe. These countries could use their position to deflect attention from their own human rights violations and block efforts to investigate and address human rights abuses in other countries.
Conclusion
The UN is an essential organization for promoting international cooperation and maintaining global peace and security. However, it is not without its flaws, and there is a growing consensus that the organization needs to be reformed and improved. The proposals outlined in this article are just a few examples of the many ways in which the UN could be strengthened.
Ultimately, the success of the UN will depend on the commitment and dedication of its member states, as well as the willingness of civil society and other stakeholders to engage with the organization. By working together, we can ensure that the UN remains a vital force for good in the world.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Cambridge University Press: (https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/global-governance-and-the-emergence-of-global-institutions-for-the-21st-century/general-assembly-reforms-to-strengthen-its-effectiveness/2E69EECD7033DC46967707D3A385733F)
Human Rights Watch: (https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/03/22/un-rights-body-should-do-more-address-abuses-russia-yemen-saudi-arabia-egypt-china)
Institute of Studies on Conflicts and Humanitarian Action: (https://iecah.org/en/un-peacekeeping-stretched-to-its-limits/)
The National News: (https://www.thenationalnews.com/world/us-news/2022/10/26/calls-for-un-security-council-reform-mount-as-global-insecurity-rises/)
The UN Refugee Agency: (https://www.unhcr.org/united-nation-and-international-institutions.html#:~:text=Most%20important%20among%20these%20are,Joint%20UN%20Programme%20on%20HIV%2F)
UNHCR The UN Refugee Agency: (https://www.unhcr.org/united-nation-and-international-institutions.html#:~:text=Most%20important%20among%20these%20are,Joint%20UN%20Programme%20on%20HIV%2F)
United Nations: (https://reform.un.org/)
United Nations Climate Change: (https://unfccc.int/)
United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner: (https://www.ohchr.org/en/about-us/high-commissioner)
United Nations Peacekeeping: (https://peacekeeping.un.org/en)
United Nations Security Council: (https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/content/voting-system#:~:text=The%20Right%20to%20Veto&text=It%20was%20agreed%20by%20the,at%20one%20time%20or%20another.)
Will Regulation Stifle Crypto, And Do We Care?
Will Regulation Stifle Crypto and Do We Care?
Technology Policy Brief #80 | By: Mindy Splatt | March 6, 2023
Header photo taken from: Getty Images
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more technology policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Kent Nishimura, Los Angeles Times / Getty Images
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Fans of crypto have enthusiastically told me it enables lower income people to invest and earn money. They think it is more democratic and less corrupt than the stock market. And they eschew consumer protections, believeing that in order for it to accomplish these wonders it must not be hampered by a governmental bureaucracy.
These same predictable arguments were made by the industry at the Senate Banking Committee’s Valentine’s Day hearing “Crypto Crash: Why Financial System Safeguards are Needed for Digital Assets.” And while these currencies market themselves “smart” and modern, their insistence that regulation hampers innovation and that consumers don’t need protections are old, tired and unproven.
The hearing was a first step for the committee, chaired by Sherod Brown (D-Ohio) and Tim Scott (R-S.C.), towards its goal of bipartisan agreement on a regulatory scheme for crypto, a goal the crypto companies are vigorously opposed to. In response they have upped their lobbying game; the industry spent over $21 million on influence in the US last year.
Professor Linda Jeng, J.D., Chief Global Regulatory Officer at the Crypto Council for Innovation, touted the ground breaking inclusionary nature of crypto free from regulatory restrains. “Most adults who are unbanked or underbanked represent communities that have historically been the victim of discriminatory or exclusionary financial practices…. Digital assets, which have lower barriers to entry and do not suffer from a legacy of exclusionary practices and stigmas, offer people from historically-excluded or unbanked/underbanked communities new access to secure, low-cost, and effective financial services.”
But Lee Reiners, policy director at Duke University’s Financial Economics Center, called this inclusion “predatory.” “There is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that crypto promotes financial inclusion,” he said. “In fact, overwhelming evidence suggests the exact opposite is happening. Most people who’ve invested in cryptocurrency have lost money. Of those people, a plurality are minorities and low-income Americans.”
Policy Analysis
Reiners likened the situation to the 2008 financial crisis, “where low-income and minority communities are being explicitly targeted with very, very risky products, and, unfortunately, they have lost — in many cases — everything.” He argued that better consumer protections are needed and favored regulation of crypto as a commodity through the Securities Exchange Commission.
Reiners was questioned by Senator Elizabeth Warren (D- Mass) on the use of crypto in money laundering schemes, ransomware attacks and other shady dealings. Reiners’s sarcastic reply was “Oh I’m sorry, crypto is the exclusive payment method of choice for ransomware hackers.’
Hilary J. Allen, professor of law at the American University Washington College of Law, agreed that crypto currency, as it currently exists, easily lends itself to fraudulent activities. “Sam Bankman-Fried may have engaged in good old-fashioned embezzlement,” she said, “but the embezzlement was able to reach such a scale and go undetected for so long because it was crypto – shrouded in opacity, complexity, and mystique.”
Senator Warren announced that she and Senator Marshall (R- Kan) would reintroduce their Digital Asset Anti-Money Laundering Act, which they say will “bring digital assets into greater compliance with anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism financing requirements.”
Chart taken from: Comply Advantage (.com)
(click or tap to enlargen)
Senator Brown released a statement supporting the application of basic consumer protections to crypto, including:
- Clear disclosures and transparency
- Prohibitions on conflicts of interest and self-dealing
- Protecting customer funds by separating them from company assets.
- Internal governance and risk management to require a platform that takes customer funds to act prudently.
- Oversight and supervision to prevent abuses.
No specific legislation or regulations were mentioned in Brown’s statement.
Despite that, industry’s response to the hearing was extremely defensive. Kristin Smith, CEO of the Blockchain Association warned in POLITICO “We’re feeling a crypto carpet-bombing moment, where they seem to be trying to throw whatever they can within their authority — or potentially exceeding their authority — and we think …it’s bad for U.S. competitiveness,” suggesting the crypto bros will take their marbles elsewhere if anyone dares to make them play by the rules.
Some of the testimony and commentary at the hearing suggest not everyone would be sorry to see them go.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Testimony at https://www.banking.senate.gov/hearings/crypto-crash-why-financial-system-safeguards-are-needed-for-digital-assets
Mr. Lee Reiners, Policy Director, Duke Financial Economics Center
Professor Linda Jeng
Visiting Scholar On Financial Technology, Adjunct Professor Of LawGeorgetown Institute of International Economic Law
Professor Yesha Yadav, Vanderbilt University Law School
Watch Video of Hearing:
https://www.c-span.org/video/?526045-1/hearing-regulating-cryptocurrency-markets
Will the Republicans Nominate Trump again? Examining Potential Indicators
Will the Republicans Nominate Trump again? Examining Potential Indicators
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #64 | By: Ian Milden | March 1, 2023
Header photo taken from: Eva Marie Uzcategui / Bloomberg
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more elections & politics policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: The Zinn Education Project
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Donald Trump launched his third campaign for the Presidency in November. For several months, he had the field to himself. With Republican rivals launching campaigns to oppose him, this Brief will examine potential indicators that will come up over the next several months to help us determine Trump’s chances of winning the Republican nomination again.
Policy Analysis
Photo taken from: Taylor Glascock / The New York Times
(click or tap to enlargen)
A recent poll conducted by NPR, PBS, and Marist College found that a majority of Republicans would prefer to nominate someone other than Donald Trump for president in 2024. While this data doesn’t suggest that Republicans are enthusiastic about a third Trump run, it’s still possible that Republicans could nominate him.
While it is too early to say whom the Republicans will nominate, there are some indicators that can be examined over the coming months that can provide a sense of Trump’s chances.
Indicator #1: The Number of Alternatives to Trump
One of the main things we don’t know about the Republican primary is who will run against Trump. Former South Carolina Governor and UN Ambassador Nikki Haley launched her campaign on February 15th. If the field is larger, financial resources, staff, and voter preferences will be split further allowing one candidate who has deep support from a specific part of the Republican base to be in a better position.
The data from the previously mentioned NPR poll indicates that Trump is still the preferred option among Republicans who identify as evangelical Christians and lack a college education. Republicans who live in urban and suburban areas, Republicans who have college degrees, and unaffiliated voters who lean towards the Republican party seem to prefer someone else.
Based on this data, it’s not unreasonable to hypothesize that Trump is starting with a deep amount of support from specific parts of the Republican base. That means that if Trump is going to lose the primary, Republicans who oppose him need to quickly coalesce around a broadly acceptable alternative, and candidates who struggle to demonstrate viability will need to quickly drop out. Republican primaries are not required to award delegates proportionally, so there is little incentive for candidates who keep losing to remain in the race.
Indicator #2: How well do alternatives stand up to scrutiny?
Running for President is different than running for Governor or Senator. Many presidential candidates who won statewide races in their home states struggled with the scrutiny that comes with a Presidential campaign. This can manifest differently for candidates. For some candidates, a major scandal could be uncovered by the national media, and that would severely damage their campaign, such as Herman Cain in 2012.
Other candidates struggle to answer questions or do well in basic campaign events, like Rick Perry in 2012. Other candidates can struggle by failing to get significant interest, taking controversial positions on important campaign issues, or failing to properly respond to negative media coverage or campaign crises. If candidates struggle to deal with scrutiny from the media, polling data will provide evidence of eroding support over the next several months.
Photo taken from: Venable LLP
(click or tap to enlargen)
Indicator #3: Campaign Finance Management
Candidates for federal offices are required to disclose how much money they have raised and spent every three months. Campaigns are also subject to some requirements on reporting what they spend their money on. Candidates who started running in the first three months of the year must publicly report their fundraising numbers to the FEC by mid-April.
There’s almost always someone who drops out of the Presidential race before the primaries start because they don’t have the financial resources to compete, or they mismanage the resources they have. Indicators of possible financial troubles are high spending in relation to the amount of money raised and a heavy reliance on donors who make the maximum contributions for the primary campaign. According to the FEC, the limit for individual contributions in the 2024 election is $3300.
While I expect Trump’s next quarterly FEC report to show that he has a strong grassroots donor base, examining his legal expenses in proportion to his other expenses and other campaign’s FEC reports may provide some insight. Trump has used his campaign funds to cover a lot of his more recent legal expenses, and if the costs of his legal defense grow, it could hamper his campaign’s ability to fund other campaign expenses.
A word about indictments
Trump is facing three separate criminal investigations. These separate investigations are run by the federal government, the New York state government, and the Fulton County, Georgia District Attorney’s office. Any or all of these investigations could lead to indictments in the coming year. While it is hard to predict how an indictment would affect the thoughts and decisions of Republican primary voters, it would not force Trump to drop out of the race. It may impact his fundraising, and it would likely force his campaign to spend more than they already are on lawyers.
A conviction and jail sentence also would not stop Trump from running. Socialist Eugene V. Debs ran for President in 1920 from federal prison, though that hurt his ability to compete. If Trump is indicted, I will wait for polling and campaign finance data to help explain the impact of an indictment on his Presidential campaign further.