JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
The Week That Was: Global News in Review
Brief #80 – Foreign Policy
by Abran C
At least 79 people have died with many more missing after a fishing boat carrying refugees and migrants sank off the southern coast of Greece last week.
The Country’s Debt Ceiling is Some Students’ Floor
Brief #84 – Education Policy
by Steve Piazza
President Biden’s announcement to forgive all or portions of qualified students’ loans came as a relief to some and an outrage to others.
The Spread of Political Misinformation and How to Stop It
Brief #81 – Elections & Politics Policy
by Rudolph Lurz
On December 4th, 2016, Edgar Welch drove several hours from his North Carolina home and entered the Comet Ping Pong pizza restaurant in Washington, D.C. carrying an AR-15 rifle.
Examining the Impeachment of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton
Brief #80 – Elections & Politics Policy
by Ian Milden
The Texas State House voted to impeach state Attorney General Ken Paxton on May 27th after a lengthy and quiet investigation by a bipartisan state house committee.
Wetlands Protection Under Attack as a Result of New Supreme Court Decision
Brief #155 – Environment Policy
by Todd J. Broadman
SCOTUS has been taking up cases that concern the scope of EPA (as well as other agencies’) authority. The Court’s ruling on a recent case – Sackett vs. EPA – will have environmental protection implications for decades to come.
Who really won the Debt Ceiling Compromise?
Brief #54 – Economic Policy
by Arvind Salem
On June 3, 2023, just two days before a disastrous default and government shutdown, President Joe Biden signed the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 to suspend the debt ceiling until 2025.
The Republican Presidential Candidates’ Positions on Abortion
Brief #79 – Elections & Politics Policy
by Abigail Hunt
Overall, each candidate supports banning abortion at some level, limiting women’s access to care and cementing our international infamy of having the worst maternal health outcomes of any developed nation, at a rate of more than 17 deaths per 100,000 births.
Will Social Media for Youths be the Next Big Tobacco?
Brief #162 – Health & Gender Policy
by Geoffrey Small
On May 23rd, The United States Surgeon General, Dr. Vivek Murthy, issued an advisory about the effects of social media on youth mental health.
DEMOCRATIC PARTY 2024 PLATFORM SUGGESTIONS PART 1: EDUCATION
OP ED
U.S. Resist News
Democrats should counter Republican curriculum interference and book banning and strike a positive tone about the needs for all children in the United States to have access to a quality education.
State Bill To Test Limits of Election Fraud Claims In California
State Bill To Test Limits of Election Fraud Claims In California
Civil Rights Policy Brief #201 | By: Rodney A. Maggay | February 28, 2023
Header photo taken from: Cindy Yamanaka, The Press-Enterprise / SCNG
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more civil rights policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Katy Grimes / California Globe
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Last month in California Assemblymember Bill Essayli, a Republican from Riverside County, introduced AB 13 that seeks to make changes to existing California state election law. There are five specific changes contained in AB 13. The bill would first eliminate the requirement of automatically mailing a ballot to every single registered voter in the state.
The bill would also restrict who can return a completed ballot if the voter is unable to physically do so to only family members and persons who are living in the same household as the voter. Furthermore, AB 13 would eliminate voting centers and also shorten the time period for county registrars to receive a mail – ballot from seven days down to three days in order to be counted. Finally, the bill would make Election Day a state holiday. LEARN MORE
Policy Analysis
While AB 13 is notable for introducing changes that could affect how elections are conducted in California there are other reasons separate from the bill that make the bill noteworthy. The first reason is the bill was introduced by a Republican member of the California state legislature. And, the bill is being viewed as a hint as to how Republicans might try to narrow the issue of voting fraud and election integrity to a smaller set of issues.
Currently, California Democrats have overwhelming majorities in both the state senate and the state assembly. They control 62 of 80 seats in the Assembly and 32 of 40 seats in the State Senate. The current Governor Gavin Newsom is also a Democrat. This supermajority in both houses of the state legislature and control of the Governor’s mansion make it challenging for Republicans to pursue policies that they favor in the state.
A Republican politician who sponsors an election bill in California that hints at debunked claims of election fraud has to know that the bill’s chances in the state are incredibly slim. California Democrats would never support a bill that implies that state elections are rigged or not secure. Assemblymember Essayli’s bill could be seen as a waste of time in a state dominated by Democrats.
When a number of candidates supported by President Trump lost key federal and state races in the 2022 election, the losses were seen as a rebuke of President Trump’s Big Lie that the 2020 election was stolen from him and that U.S. elections are somehow rigged. However, some candidates clung hard to the Big Lie, likely as a way to explain their own election loss.
What Assemblymember Essalyi’s introduction of AB 13 is being seen as is a way to continue the theme of broken elections but narrowing the issue to make it more palatable to persons who might not believe that elections are rigged and unsecure. Instead of throwing every conceivable conspiracy theory out there as to why a certain election is not legitimate, Republican Essayli’s bill focuses on a limited number of issues.
Photo taken from: Politifact California, Twitter
(click or tap to enlargen)
AB 13 first tries to eliminate California’s requirement of mailing a ballot to every registered voter. This requirement was only recently implemented in 2020 because of the COVID-19 pandemic. And the bill would also change who can return a completed ballot on behalf of another person and then shortens the time for ballots to be collected from the county registrar – down to three days from seven.
While these proposals may seem benign on the surface, the fact that a Republican politician is trying to introduce these election reforms in a Democratic controlled state signals that Republicans may be trying to move on from loud unfounded claims of voter fraud with no evidence to more narrow and focused election claims that might garner support.
Luckily, Democrats in the California Assembly and other groups were quick to push back. Some called the bill another excuse for GOP candidates to fix a non – existent problem simply because an election did not go their way. And others pushed back that problems thought to exist in ballot harvesting, having ballots mailed to everyone and long collection periods that delay the results of an election are problems that are being exaggerated to an extreme.
But the danger of election deniers and the false information that they peddle is still out there and a threat. Republican politicians can still introduce bills that sound ordinary and pose no threat on the surface. Or they can include provisions that have wide appeal like making Election Day a state holiday to make a bill sound good.
What needs to be done to counter these threats is to closely scrutinize these voting bills and make sure they do not go further than what is intended and that they do not roll back advancements made in California. With Assemblymember Essayli’s AB 13, Democrats must ensure that the proposals are rational, justified and necessary and not merely an echo of Trump’s lies about the 2020 election. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
American Progress – group’s report on how election deniers fared in the 2022 elections.
NBC News – report on the dangers election deniers pose to future elections.
Is The Premier League Getting Out of Control?
Is The Premier League Getting Out of Control?
Foreign Policy Brief #173 | By: Reilly Fitzgerald | February 27, 2023
Header photo taken from: Craig Brough / Reuters
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more foreign policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Deloitte Football Money League, Bloomberg Opinion
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The Premier League, England’s top division of professional football, is known for elite levels of competition (soccer); huge budgets for teams; massive player personalities, and more. But has the league gotten out of control? Over the past several years, we have seen the amount of money being spent on individual player transfers skyrocket, and the race to own teams in the Premier League has been more than competitive. The most recent and controversial acquisitions being via Middle Eastern money spent to purchase teams like Manchester City, Newcastle United – and currently there is a Qatari bid to own Manchester United, one of the most influential teams in the world.
Global football has been under the influence of wealthy actors for a long time. However, the introduction of new Middle Eastern wealth to the sport has increased the amount of governmental influences on the “beautiful game”. In recent weeks the Manchester City Football Club has been heavily scrutinized following an investigation into their role in breaking over 100 financial fair play rules over a nine-year period.
Policy Analysis
The UK government has been debating the idea of having more oversight in regards to the finances of Premier League clubs. Over the past few years, the world has seen unprecedented amounts of money spent on individual player transfers, team acquisitions by actors within foreign governments like the Saudi Arabian Public Investment Fund (PIF), talks of teams entering into new leagues across Europe at the exclusion of other teams, and so much more.
Reports coming out of many media outlets, and also the Premier League itself, have spelled out the arguments for increasing the oversight of the Premier League, and perhaps the entirety of English football by the UK government. The concerns surrounding the league are mostly financial.
As stated earlier, Manchester City FC has been investigated by the Premier League for violating Financial Fair Play rules over 100 times. Manchester City is owned by a Middle Eastern financial group, called the City Football Group; led by Sheikh Mansour, the club’s owner. Manchester City, for those non-football fans, is one of the most dominant and successful teams in the world – and one of the highest paying clubs in the world.
The transfer of Jack Grealish in 2021 from London’s Aston Villa, at the time was the most expensive transfer in Manchester City history, at a record £100m. As expensive as Jack Grealish’s transfer was, it has since been eclipsed by the spending of Chelsea FC, which from last summer until the most recent transfer window closing spent over £500m on new signings and transfers. Chelsea currently sits in 10th place out of 20 teams.
Many teams in English football cannot, simply, afford to compete with the wages that teams such as Manchester City. High wages for players has created a league that really only has a select number of teams competing for the title. Many face relegation to lower divisions in English football or financial ruin.
Photo taken from: Chloe Knott – Danehouse, Getty Images Sport, Getty Images
(click or tap to enlargen)
Another concern is the idea of the European “Super League”, which would be an exclusive league just for some of the richest teams in Europe to play against each other. A similar contest already exists with the UEFA Champions League; however, teams have to qualify for this yearly tournament based on their success in their domestic leagues. For example, the top four teams in England will compete in the Champions League against other leading European teams.
The idea of the Super League is to create a set list of teams that would play against each other all season long, without qualifications, at the exclusion of other teams. Most of the teams would be in the league on a permanent basis and a select handful of spots in the league would be via a qualification process.
This issue is so contentious that some leagues have issued statements suggesting that teams that participate in the Super League be banned from domestic competitions like the Premier League or La Liga (Spain’s first division of football), or even that players could be banned from international competitions like the World Cup.
According to CNBC, the UK government would like to start monitoring the people that bid to take ownership of clubs within their country. Some have suggested that whoever takes over regulating the Premier League may want to take a closer examination of whether a country is buying a club or an individual; and examine the human rights records of the entities involved in the purchase of a club.
Currently, Manchester United Football Club is looking at a change in ownership from the Glazer family, who also own the NFL’s Tampa Bay Buccaneers. The current bids are from Sir Jim Ratcliffe, the owner of INEOS, and from Sheikh Jassim bin Hammad Al Thani, who is with the Qatari bank QIB. The listing price of Manchester United starts around £4 billion.
All of these reasons, and more, are reasons why the UK government is concerned about their Premier League. The financial risks involved, for many teams, are severe and concerning. Spending has gone out of control and clubs, like Manchester City, are starting to not follow Financial Fair Play rules.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
CNBC Article – https://www.cnbc.com/2023/02/23/englands-prized-soccer-league-to-face-regulation-and-tough-new-ownership-rules.html
Everyday Life in Ukraine in the Midst of a War
Everyday Life in Ukraine in the Midst of a War
Foreign Policy Brief #172 | By: Yelena Korshunov | February 28, 2023
Header photo taken from: Photo from ru.euronews.com – Odessa without electricity.
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more foreign policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from an Odessa resident.
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
February 24th 2022 is now the day in world history when Russia started a bloody violent war against Ukraine. For another year Ukrainians have been suffering from Russian missiles, cruelty, and terrorist attacks on energy infrastructure. People are used now to constant power outages. They have learned to adapt to it. Refrigerators are disconnected from outlets and turned to closets with cans, pastas, grains, and dried bread. Balconies are turned into refrigerators.
Policy Analysis
For long months Ukrainians live with electricity turned on only several hours a day if lucky, while many of them stay without power for 2-4 days in a row, especially in the Odessa region in South Ukraine. This condition is especially cruel in winter, when it is freezing outside and very cold in houses and apartments while heating, water supply, and often phones and Internet are off. Many buildings’ residents climb to the top floors every day since elevators don’t work. Older people are forced to stay at home.
Natalia is an Odessa resident. She is 82. She lives in an apartment on the 12th floor. “I can’t take the stairs to go outside. My neighbor, God bless her, buys bread and milk for me,” she says. Natalia has a supply of water in a big cooking pot. The neighbor also carries water bottles from the pump stations for her. “But we are lucky to have gas! Many new buildings are supplied with electrical ovens, so residents can’t even cook or heat water when electricity is off. In these conditions, there is no longer healthy food for many of them. Some are lucky to have a tourist gas burner to cook on”.
Photo taken from an Odessa resident.
(click or tap to enlargen)
Ukrainians can buy gas devices and cylinders online and in stores, but there is a high risk of an explosion, which, unfortunately, has become more frequent due to the careless or unconfident operation of these devices. Prices for light supplies jumped up because of the high demand. However, candles, flashlights, lanterns working on batteries, and power banks are a temporary solution when power is off for a long period.
Photo taken from: youtube.com
(click or tap to enlargen)
Photo taken from: rus.delfi.ee
(click or tap to enlargen)
As for the water supply, the only solution for people is to store water in all available containers. Otherwise you will have to look for pump stations, stand in a long line and carry precious water up the stairs home. Probably, you will have to make more than one such trip to provide enough water for the needs of the family.
Tamara works remotely and that became a big challenge with regular blackouts. Her two children attended school before the war, but now they switched to remote learning because of the constant air raid alarms. Students randomly have on-line lessons when electricity is on. The school has a power generator, so teachers are able to provide remote classes, but few students have power generators at home so few students attend. “I always have a desk lamp on and its light wakes me up when we get electricity at night,” Tamara says, “so I am able to do my remote work. My kids ask me to also wake them up to turn on computers and do their homework. Well, at least I’m lucky to still have my job while a lot of people around have lost it because of war.”
Even in this hard condition students do not stop learning. During daylight, at nights, wearing warm clothes, children continue their education. Child care centers for younger kids do their best to be open for in-person attendance. They use generators and lanterns, and kids have their routine activities wearing an extra pair of pants and a warm sweater. When the air alarm sounds they interrupt learning and play to go down to a safe place if they have one. In fact, many facilities don’t have a secure shelter.
“We have one more big problem because of constant blackouts,” tells Tamara, “and that is financial. Many people are used to not paying by cash any more. We use credit cards and apps on our phones. So power outages have become an obstacle for the simplest pay in a local store. Now you should always have cash in your pocket, but many ATMs are out of cash, so withdrawing bills is also a challenge”.
There is another year when Ukrainians have been fighting for their freedom, their land and lives. Ukrainian children have been waiting for the day when they won’t hear the scary sound of an air raid alert anymore. They dream about the day when they wake up in the morning and go to school, meet their friends, and play sports not interrupted by a blood-freezing howling alarm. They can’t wait for the day when their dads and brothers come back home alive. They are waiting for victory, for light, for peace.
The Ukraine War: One Year on
The Ukraine War: One Year On
Foreign Policy Brief #171 | By: Abran C | February 25, 2023
Header photo taken from: Financial Times
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more foreign policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Tyler Hicks / The New York Times
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
We have arrived at the one year mark of the invasion of Ukraine, a war that has caused widespread destruction, displacement, and death as Ukraine still continues to fight back against Russia’s invading army with no end in sight. One year ago Russian forces at the command of Vladimir Putin launched the largest war on the European continent since World War II.
Energy costs, food prices, and economies worldwide have been negatively impacted. Both Ukraine and Russia have lost more than 100,000 lives in the past year, and millions of innocent people daily continue to suffer the consequences of the war. As the war continues to rage it is worth looking at where we’ve been, what’s been the cost of the war, and where we’re headed.
What’s Happened So Far: Key Moments in the War
Russia had already been waging war on the Crimean peninsula since March 2014, which is technically the true beginning of its war in Ukraine. On February 24, 2022 Russian forces invaded Ukraine with the intention of taking over the country completely and capturing its capital.
Russia has made claims that the invasion of Ukraine was and continues to be carried out in order to “denazify” Ukraine and prevent it from joining NATO and moving closer into the sphere of the West. The invading forces entered through land, air, and sea, Russian troops quickly reached Kyiv’s outskirts, but their attempts to capture the capital and other cities met stiff resistance whiuch is still in effect.
Russia later in March took control of the southern city of Kherson and occupied a large part of the neighboring Zaporizhzhia region, including the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, Europe’s largest nuclear facility, which remains at risk of causing catastrophic disaster if the powerplant is not kept secure from fighting.
In April, after two months the Russian pullback from Kyiv revealed hundreds of bodies of civilians in mass graves or left in the streets of the town of Bucha, many of them bearing signs of torture.
Photo taken from: Sergey Dolzhenko / Shutterstock
(click or tap to enlargen)
Later in May, after weeks of intense battle the city of Mariupol’s fell to the Russians and cut Ukraine off from the Azov coast and secured a land corridor for Russia from its border to Crimea. In July Russia and Ukraine, with mediation by Turkey and the UN, agreed to a deal to release tons of grain stuck in Ukrainian Black Sea ports, ending a standoff that threatened global food security.
In September Putin ordered the mobilization of 300,000 reservists, a widely unpopular move that prompted hundreds of thousands of Russian men to flee the country to avoid recruitment. During the same time, Russia staged “referendums” in Ukraine’s Eastern Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions on whether to become part of Russia. The votes were widely dismissed as a sham by Ukraine and the West.
In October as winter began to set in, Russia launched a series of missile strikes on Ukraine’s power plants and other key infrastructure. In November Russia announced a pullback from the regional capital city of Kherson after a fierce Ukrainian counteroffensive, in a humiliating retreat for the Kremlin.
In January, Russia along with help from the private mercenary Wagner Group declared the capture of the salt-mining town of Soledar, hoping to use it as a springboard to capture the Ukrainian stronghold of Bakhmut. Now at the one year mark in February, Ukrainian troops are still fighting to retake the Eastern part of their country. Russia struggles to make gains but remains defiant in spite of condemnation and huge losses, and Western powers are gearing up to send more weapons to Ukraine.
Cost of War
Infoographic taken from: OSM, UNHCR
The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) verified a total of 8,006 civilian deaths during Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as of February, 2023. Of them, 487 are children, and a further 13,287 people are reported to have been injured. All of these numbers are likely under-estimates. Additionally it is estimated that about 100,000 soldiers have been killed on both sides of the conflict, though exact numbers are difficult to verify.
Over the course of the war up to 8 million Ukrainians have fled and are displaced in neighboring countries around Europe, making it the largest refugee crisis in Europe since the Second World War and the largest refugee crisis of the 21st century. There have also been disturbing reports such as that by Human Rights Watch which documented that some Ukrainian civilians were being forcibly transferred to Russia. The US Department of State has estimated that at least 900,000 Ukrainian citizens have been forcibly relocated into Russia.
EU block countries have allowed entry and asylum to all Ukrainian refugees, and invoked a Temporary Protection Directive that grants Ukrainians the right to stay, work, and study in any European Union member state for a period of one year.
It is estimated that Russia has spent some $82 billion dollars since the start of its war in Ukraine. Russia’s budget revenue last year amounted to $340 billion, meaning that it has spent roughly a quarter of its total 2021 earnings on a war that has made little gains and isolated Russia from the rest of Europe. Ukraine’s economy shrank by more than 30% in 2022, which is its largest decline since its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991.
Where Are We Headed
Photo taken from: Dmitry Astakhov / Sputnik / AFP via Getty Images
Unfortunately as of the time of writing there is no indication of a possibility of peace talks, Ukraine is committed to reclaiming its lost territory and Russia is doing all it can to increase its territorial gains in order to save face for the disaster the war has been. Additionally tensions between Russia and the West are higher than any other time in the 21st century.
In his recent State of the Nation speech Vladmimir Putin announced Russia would halt its participation in the New Start treaty, the last remaining nuclear arms control treaty with the US. The New Start treaty provides for limits on the deployed strategic nuclear arsenals of the world’s two largest nuclear powers, capping strategic nuclear assets at 1,550 deployed warheads and 700 deployed missiles. The treaty also allows joint monitoring of each country’s deployed nuclear arsenals which hold 90% of the world nuclear stock, the suspension and possible withdrawal from this treaty is very troubling for the international community as a whole.
Putin also described the war in Ukraine as having been started by the US and Western powers saying, “The responsibility is on the West and the Ukrainian elite and government, which does not serve the national interest, but rather serves the interest of third countries which use Ukraine as a military base to fight Russia. The only certainty at the moment is that the war will continue on into 2023 and possibly beyond.
Montana Debates Letting Doctors Refuse Care to LGBTQ Citizens
Montana Debates Letting Doctors Refuse Care to LGBTQ Citizens
Health and Gender Policy Brief #157 | By: Caroline Howard | February 23, 2023
Header photo taken from: ktvq.com
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more health and gender policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Rachel Leathe / Bozeman Daily Chronicle
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The Montana House of Representatives recently debated and then passed a bill which is being referred to as a medical right of conscience law. This act, as the Montana Free Press put it, would allow “medical institutions, providers and other health care employees to deny services based on their ‘ethical, moral, or religious beliefs or principles’”.
Among the concerns that have been raised if such a bill was passed and then implemented, was the possibility that a doctor, first responder, or any other medical professional or even insurance company could deny care for people that are a part of the LGBTQ community because it violates the religious conscience of someone working in that field. A transgender man named Ezekial Cork said in a testimony against the bill that, “If I’m in an accident or medical emergency, with a law like this in place, a medical care provider could raise the right of conscience card, disregard their Hippocratic oath, and refuse to treat me”.
The bill currently reads, “A health care institution or health care payer may not be required to participate in or pay for a health care service that violates the health care institution’s or health care payer’s conscience, including by permitting the use of its facilities”. Many advocates against this legislation say that the wording is vague enough that this will mean, if implemented, that LGBTQ citizens can also be denied care, even if they are currently dying in front of a medical professional, and need immediate care.
Policy Analysis
A bill like this brings up so many issues, including why someone becomes a doctor in the first place if they aren’t going to actually live by the hippocratic oath and serve anyone who needs help.
Saying that any medical professional can just deny care because it goes against their conscience should be evidence enough that the person is unqualified to be in that profession. If this bill is passed and implemented, which is a long shot considering the varied potential legal challenges that await it if it is signed into law, LGBTQ Montanans will have less access to the life-saving medical care they need, including mental health services.
Photo taken from: Mercer (.com)
The reason there may be legal challenges is because of the Bostock v. Clayton County Georgia supreme court case that was decided in 2020. This case decided that sexual orientation and gender identity were inherently covered under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
In the majority opinion, authored by Neil Gorsuch, it states clearly that, “Because discrimination on the basis of homosexuality or transgender status requires an employer to intentionally treat individual employees differently because of their sex, an employer who intentionally penalizes an employee for being homosexual or transgender also violates Title VII”.
What justice Gorsuch is saying is that discrimination of a person based on their gender identity or sexual orientation is inherently based on their biological sex. It makes sense, because someone who is seen as male wouldn’t be discriminated against if they were attracted to someone of the opposite sex. It inherently has to do with the biological sex of the person involved.
Of course, legal interpretations are bound to change over time, as the Dobbs case did with Roe v. Wade; and maybe this bill intends to attempt to upend that precedent. With the new makeup of the court, it is very likely that a decision overturning Bostock v. Clayton County could take place, but in the meantime, a bill like this will very likely not take effect for a while as it is fought in the courts.
Congress Needs to Act on Bills Regulating Data Brokers
Congress Needs to Act on Bills Regulating Data Brokers
Technology Policy Brief #79 | By: Steve Piazza | February 21, 2023
Header photo taken from: Pavlo Gonchar / Getty Images
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more technology policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Sean Gallup / Getty Images
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Ever since Congress enacted the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 it has been unable to secure legislation to increase privacy protection that better reflects the technologies of today.
Over the past few years, several bills have been introduced in Congress that are specifically targeting data brokers, or companies that use AI and other methods to collect and organize personal information for the purpose of selling to businesses or law-enforcement:
- S.1265 Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act (2021)
- H.R.8152 American Data Privacy and Protection Act (introduced 2022)
- S.4408 Health and Location Data Protection Act of 2022
Though the activity is a positive sign for the public, the lack of speed in passing these and others are examples that the trend to do nothing still lingers.
Policy Analysis
Information may be power, but it is also a lucrative business. A number of corporations have recognized the value of information as a commodity by mining, cleaning, and bundling a myriad of personal data into manageable packages for other businesses to easily use.
These data brokers have benefited from the uses of advances in technology that allow for the algorithms of AI to obtain specific information from individuals who relinquish it into the public arena just by using the Internet. Every time somebody visits a website and clicks “allow” so that others can access its content, they are agreeing to share any information provided, even if it’s just the links they click on in passing.
As a result, simple key strokes have resulted in an industry worth hundreds of billions of dollars.
Some data brokers are familiar companies, like Experian and Equifax, which operate under a benign mission of credit agencies but still sell information for profit. Others, like Oracle and Cisco, benefit from information obtained in the popular networking platforms they are more noted for. But the largest data brokers, like Acxiom LLC and Epsilon, are not quite household names, and that’s because selling personal information behind the scenes is mostly what they do.
And for a little perspective on how big is big, according to some analyses, Acxiom may be processing the data on more than 2.5 billion people it obtained from over 62 countries.
In the U.S, data brokers take advantage of a number of loopholes in laws that allow them to take public information and profit from it despite jeopardizing the privacy of individuals.
The number of regulatory bills that Congress has proposed are an indication of the recognition that action is needed. The delay in passing them is an indication that the data brokers lobbying efforts have been paying off. Companies have paid up to nearly $7 billion to see that those efforts have stalled.
Chart taken from: Lobbying Disclosure Act / Politico
(click or tap to enlargen)
Chart taken from: Privacy Bee
(click or tap to enlargen)
But even if the regulations are in place, enforcing them is the issue. With information swapped in fractions of a second and stored in clouds, it’s very difficult and very expensive for government agencies to keep pace with private efforts to share data.
Data brokers buy their information from firms that rely directly on personal data (e.g. credit card companies) or they may get it from records available to the public, like those pertaining to taxes, public utilities, or court proceedings. They then organize the data intro marketable formats in order to sell to other interested parties.
Why does all this matter? The ease of information gathering from purchases, cookies, audio selections, phone calls, and other activities can be aggregated into user profiles through the linking of similar data points. Then, the ubiquity of personal information, whether accurate or inaccurate, subjects innocent people to everything from financial peril to the weaponization of information against women seeking reproductive health care or those most vulnerable to racial injustice.
The problem may not solely be the fact that people are sharing, often unknowingly, their personal information and searching habits. But the problem is clearly the lack of transparency of and restrictions on companies in obtaining information and what they do with it. Even taking something that’s in the public domain and making it private for profit is specious and invasive in many ways.
This is not to say that action is impossible. The California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) in 2018 requires transparency and the option for individuals to request for data to be removed. Several other states have followed suit. Elsewhere, the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (2018), what the CCPA is based on, is considered to be a model for the world.
Hopefully, existing bills and others gain traction soon and things can change. Until then, users might help themselves to think more about what’s being allowed.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Privacy Rights.org provides programs and comprehensible information on privacy laws and individual rights. For more information, visit https://privacyrights.org/
Just Future Laws is a group of legal advocates who work for social justice by empowering individuals and communities. To see how they are involved in their work to prevent abuses by data brokers, click here.
Demand Progress is a nonprofit organization that attempts to hold the government accountable in a number of areas, including how it protects individuals’ privacy.
The National Consumer Law Center advocates for economic justice for people with limited resources. Learn more at https://www.nclc.org/ .
An Early Look at the 2023 Mississippi Governor’s Race
An Early Look at the 2023 Mississippi Governor’s Race
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #63 | By: Ian Milden | February 16, 2023
Header photo taken from: The Daily Leader
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more elections & politics policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: The Associated Press / The Clarion Ledger
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Three states hold elections for governor in years before the Presidential Election. This brief will look at the governor’s race in Mississippi, the only race this year where it is currently clear who the nominees will be. This brief will also discuss some current issues in Mississippi politics that could become important issues in the campaign.
Policy Analysis
Governor Tate Reeves (R-MS) is running for a second term. Reeves has previously served as the lieutenant governor and state treasurer, where he held both positions for eight years.
Reeves defeated the last Democratic statewide officeholder, Attorney General Jim Hood, in 2019 by five points. In most circumstances, an incumbent Republican governor in the deep south is not a vulnerable incumbent. Reeves is a significant favorite to win reelection, but multiple issues in Mississippi politics are dragging down his popularity.
Rural hospitals have been closing at an alarming rate. The state health officer informed the Mississippi state legislature at the end of 2022 that 38 rural hospitals were at risk of closing in the near future due to funding issues. Many states, including states run by Republican governors, have expanded Medicaid to help hospitals keep their doors open.
Mississippi is one of the few states that has not expanded Medicaid, despite polls showing strong support for expanding Medicaid in the state. Governor Reeves is opposed to Medicaid expansion and has asked legislators to block it. Reeves has also criticized officials in the state who have openly supported expanding Medicaid, which is increasing tension within the Republican Party.
In addition to healthcare being a significant campaign issue, the Reeves Administration is facing a significant and growing scandal with the Department of Human Services. The Department of Human Services operates many programs to help people and communities. These include programs funded by the Federal Government, such as the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP) and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). The misuse of these funds has become the biggest public fraud case in state history.
Photo taken from: Rogelio V. Solis / The Associated Press
(click or tap to enlargen)
An investigation conducted by the state auditor’s office found that millions of dollars intended for use as part of federal anti-poverty programs was diverted to wealthy individuals, including retired professional athletes such as Brett Favre, to fund projects that were not related to anti-poverty initiatives. Favre has paid some of the funds back, but the state auditor’s office is suing Favre for the rest of the funds. Favre is asking for the lawsuit to be dismissed. The state auditor’s office has also filed lawsuits against other individuals and entities to recover misused funds.
The former director of the Department of Human Services has already pleaded guilty to multiple crimes related to the Department’s fraudulent use of funds. Other individuals who received and misused funds have also pleaded guilty to financial crimes or are facing criminal charges from state prosecutors. Favre has yet to be indicted, but there is no indication that the investigation has concluded.
Photo taken from: Rogelio V. Solis / The Associated Press
Governor Reeves has attempted to blame his predecessor, Governor Phil Bryant, but records show that the fraud started during the Bryant Administration and continued during the Reeves Administration. Reeves was also the lieutenant governor under Bryant. Reeves has also fired Brad Pigott, the lawyer who was handling the civil fraud cases related to this scandal. The governor has accused him of getting improperly involved in state politics. Pigott said that he was only doing his job.
The federal government has not been heavily involved in this case even though federal dollars were fraudulently used. State Auditor Shad White worked with the local district attorney’s office on the initial indictments without contacting the federal government. White was appointed to be the auditor by Governor Bryant when the position became vacant. Bryant helped White win the election when his appointed term expired. Given the close relationship between White and Bryant, there are concerns that Mississippi’s state government won’t do a full investigation into this public fraud case.
The likely Democratic candidate for governor is Brandon Presley. Presley serves on the Mississippi Public Service Commission. The Mississippi Public Service Commission is responsible for regulating public utilities. Presley previously served as the mayor of a small town called Nettleton, Mississippi. Presley is not well-known in the state, but he is running on an anti-corruption platform that fits well with the state’s current environment. The anti-corruption platform may help Presley win the white voters he needs to compete statewide, which most Democrats have struggled with in Mississippi.
Early polls show that the race for Governor is starting in the margin of error, and polling data shows that voters are very concerned about the welfare scandal. While Mississippi remains an extremely hard state for Democrats to win in, Presley might have a chance to win if the scandals around Reeves’ administration continue to grow.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Brandon Presley’s Campaign Website
https://www.brandonpresley.com/
Democratic Governors Association Website
Judicial Credibility At Issue In North Carolina Supreme Court Case
Judicial Credibility At Issue In North Carolina Supreme Court Case
Civil Rights Policy Brief #200 | By: Rodney A. Maggay | February 20, 2023
Header photo taken from: Kira Lerner / States Newsroom
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more civil policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Photo by Samantha Lewis / The Daily Tar Heel
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
In 2018, North Carolina voters approved a constitutional amendment that would require a voter to present a valid photo ID in order to vote in – person. In response, North Carolina’s Republican majority state legislature enacted S.B. 824, which would implement the amendment even though Governor Roy Cooper vetoed the bill. The issue of a voter ID as a requirement to vote is controversial and multiple lawsuits in federal and state courts challenging the amendment soon followed.
In 2018, the case North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP v. Raymond was filed in federal district court. That case resulted in the court temporarily blocking the voter ID law from going into effect. That order was then appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, which reversed the district court blocking the voter ID law.
While that case moved through the federal courts, a similar case in the North Carolina state courts proceeded to challenge S.B. 824. The case was heard before a three – judge panel who determined, after a three – week trial, that racial discrimination was a motivating factor to enact S.B. 824. As a result, the bill was held to be in violation of the North Carolina state constitution. The case was then appealed to the North Carolina Supreme Court, which affirmed in December 2022 in a 5 – 4 vote the trial court’s decision to permanently block the bill from taking effect. The decision presented a concise and thorough analysis demonstrating why the bill was flawed from a constitutional standpoint.
However, the 2022 North Carolina mid term elections for the state supreme court changed the composition of the court. The state supreme court changed from a 5 – 4 Democratic majority to five seats on the court now being occupied by Republicans. And as a direct result of this change, Republicans in the North Carolina legislature appealed to the North Carolina Supreme Court again for a re-hearing on the case that permanently blocked S.B. 824. In a surprising move, the Supreme Court agreed to re-hear the case and set a date for oral arguments for March 15, 2023. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE
Policy Analysis
What is remarkable about the decision of the North Carolina Supreme Court to grant a re – hearing is that a grant for a re – hearing is exceedingly rare (a re – hearing by the North Carolina Supreme Court has been granted only twice in the last thirty years) and that it was only granted after the composition of the court was significantly changed.
What the grant of re – hearing for the two cases (the second case is about gerrymandered maps) illustrates is a reason why there has been a decline in the credibility of courts (e.g., Supreme Court of the United States) and the judiciary for the last few years. Gov. Roy Cooper was right on point when he criticized the decision to re – hear by saying “Rehearing cases because you don’t like the previous outcome isn’t how our judicial system is supposed to work.”
He went on to say further that “[T]he meaning of the constitution doesn’t change when new judges are elected.” This is a direct result of the divisive nature of politics today. When politicians and voters engage in extreme “end of democracy” rhetoric and insist that only they know what is right, they become more inclined to take actions that should be left alone instead of maybe reaching out to make compromises with their colleagues.
By not accepting the finality of a court decision, politicians are further destroying the credibility of the judicial system by sending out the message that a court can be manipulated for partisan ends if new and more favorable judges and justices are installed. It’s a slippery slope that politicians and members of the judiciary should not embark on.
Photo taken from: Carolyn Kaster / The Associated Press
(click or tap to enlargen)
Another disappointing aspect of the order granting a re – hearing is how it diminishes not just the credibility of the persons serving on the court but the words, analysis and legal reasoning put forth by the court. Justice Morgan, a member of the court wrote that the court has implemented high standards and provided thorough and studied legal analysis of the issues based on written submissions and oral arguments heard.
The decision initially holding S.B. 824 unconstitutional was done with precision and care and with a respect for legal precedents. But if the case is re – heard, a decision overturning that decision will further destroy the credibility of what the court has to say in the future because most will understand that the new reasoning put forth is blatantly partisan.
There will be less and less trust in the words coming from the court because people will know that the outcome was likely decided beforehand and the legal analysis was only written to fit a political agenda.
Judges are to be neutral and the judiciary is supposed to offer a fair and impartial hearing but those attributes will not mean much if reasoned and thoughtful legal analysis and settled rules can be overturned for partisan ends. 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
Brennan Center for Justice – analysis of Holmes v. Moore case holding S.B. 824 unconstitutional.
Southern Coalition for Social Justice – press release and analysis from non – profit group criticizing North Carolina Supreme Court’s decision to grant a re – hearing to Holmes v. Moore case.
The Week That Was #4
The Week That Was #4
Foreign Policy Brief #170 | By: Abran C | February 16, 2023
Header photo taken from: Sergey Ponomarev / The New York Times
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more foreign policy briefs from the top dashboard
A new series to catch you up on the top stories that occurred around the world last week.
Screenshot taken from: Al Jazeera
Turkey & Syria Earthquakes
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Last week two powerful magnitude 7.8 and 7.5 earthquakes struck both Turkey and Syria causing widespread destruction and loss of life. The earthquakes have been called the worst natural disaster of the century by the World Health Organization. The death toll currently stands at more than 40,000 between the two countries, with another 100,000 people hospitalized, and millions homeless. Rescue teams continue to search for any remaining survivors in the mountains of rubble, but efforts have turned more towards recovery than rescue.
Dozens of countries have sent aid into Turkey, where currently more than 200,000 national and international relief workers are present. Aid however has been slower to reach Syria which is still embroiled in civil war. International sanctions have made it so relief is not able to enter into the country in many cases, and Syrian President Bashar-al-Assad has been resistant to allow aid to reach areas controlled by opposition forces.
Syria has already been facing a massive humanitarian crisis, with millions of people displaced due to war and the destruction brought about by the earthquake will exacerbate the already dire situation within the country. In Turkey, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been criticized for his response to the natural disaster, recently he made statements attempting to reassure a country that was already suffering from economic hardship before the quake struck. “Nobody should have any doubt: This nation overcame many disasters, we will overcome this one, too”, he said.
Security in the Asia-Pacific
The leaders of Japan and the Philippines met last week and agreed to increase defense alliances in response to both countries’ worries of an expanding Chinese influence in the region.
The defense arrangement signed by Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida will allow Japanese troops greater access to Philippine territory.
The countries will also hold joint training exercises to help respond to the growing number of natural disasters and humanitarian needs due to extreme weather events brought on by climate change. Philippine President Marcos’s agreement with Japan comes shortly after US Secretary of Defence Lloyd Austin reached an agreement with the Philippines, allowing the US more access to the countries’ military bases.
During the same week North Korea held a military parade where it showed off its largest new missiles. The ceremony featured its new solid-fuel intercontinental ballistic missiles.
Photo taken from: Kimimasa Mayama / Associated Press
(click or tap to enlargen)
North Korea’s military parades are closely watched by foreign governments and experts as they often feature newly developed weapons that it intends to test or deploy.
Pyongyang says its weapons development programmes fall under its sovereign right to self-defense, and are necessary because of aggressive policies and actions towards it by the United States and allies like South Korea and Japan.
Brazilian Amazon Deforestation Drops for the First Time in Years
Photo taken from: Reuters / Ueslei Marcelino
Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon dropped by 61% in the first month of 2023, which can in large part be accredited to left-leaning President Luiz Lula da Silva. Experts caution that while the decrease in deforestation is a good sign it’s still too early to celebrate. Deforestation decreased but has not stopped, satellite data collected by the space research agency Inpe showed that 64 miles of forest were cleared last month, though that’s down from the 166 miles lost in January 2022.
The large-scale deforestation experienced throughout the last few years occurred under the watch and encouragement of former far-right President Jair Bolsonaro who allowed incursions into indigenous territory to mine for resources. Brazil, now under its new government, has launched raids against the illegal gold miners who are responsible for the humanitarian crisis in the country’s largest Indigenous reservation.
For years, Yanomami Indigenous leaders have said the expansion of illegal mining into their territories was causing widespread environmental degradation, violence, and disease and action is now finally being carried out to assist in the humanitarian and environmental emergency.
Facebook’s Advertising Practices Run Afoul of Privacy Protection Rules in Europe
Facebook’s Advertising Practices Run Afoul of Privacy Protection Rules in Europe
Technology Policy Brief #53 | By: Mindy Spatt | February 14, 2023
Header photo taken from: Jeff Chiu / Associated Press
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more technology policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Tolga Akmen / Getty Images
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
A groundbreaking decision by European regulators is pushing Meta, parent company of Facebook and Instagram, to make changes to its advertising policies. The ruling goes further than any US authority has gone in limiting Facebooks’ ability to collect users’ data. Meta is expected to appeal.
Policy Analysis
Meta’s terms-of-service agreement, the long statement that a user must accept in order to gain access to Facebook and Instagram, got it in the cross hairs of Ireland’s Data Privacy Board, the lead EU regulator because Meta’s European headquarters are in Dublin.
Included in the agreement is permission for Meta to collect the users’ data and use it for their personalized ad business.
The Board determined that the placement of user’s legal consent to share their data within the terms of service was in violation of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation, which requires the user’s consent to data sharing. The problem is that there is no other way to sign up for Facebook or Instagram and no way to opt out of the data collection, let alone an opt-in, which what privacy advocates have long called for.
If the decision is finalized and enforced, Meta would need to change its surveillance and consent practices, and the way it’s core advertising works. Targeted ads could no longer be sent to users unless they had affirmatively consented to it. Meta could pivot to “contextual ads” which are based on the content a user is interacting with.
Those changes wouldn’t be required here in the US, where no similar federal privacy protections exist. But any changes that Meta makes as a result of the ruling could affect users in the United States due to the difficulty of applying different rules to users in different countries.
Infographic taken from: Council of the European Union
(click or tap to enlargen)
Over in Great Britain, Meta faces additional pressure from Foxglove, a non-profit that “fights to make tech fair for everyone,” Tanya O’Carroll, a campaigner with the group, is suing Facebook under UK data laws. Her claim is based on the same required terms of service as the EU decision.
The extent to which Facebook’s ad business relies on profiling is hard to fathom; it produces over $100 billion a year in revenue According to O’Carroll, Facebook has assigned 700 different tracking categories to her. Historically, Facebook has tracked users by gender, race, sexual preference, politics and, all important for advertisers, whether they have children.
Another UK based nonprofit, Global Witness, tested the way Facebook’s targeting works by running a series of ads and found that:
• 96% of the people shown an ad for mechanic jobs were men
• 95% of those shown an ad for nursery nurse jobs were women
• 75% of those shown an ad for pilot jobs were men
• 77% of those shown an ad for psychologist jobs were women
Here in the US, efforts like the Banning Surveillance Advertising Act of 2022 (See Technology Policy Brief #63) have failed to enshrine any privacy rights into federal law. The closest equivalent to GDPR is California’s Consumer Privacy Act, which establishes a state privacy protection agency.
Colorado, Connecticut, Utah and Virginia also have data protection laws, but as of yet no authority requires Meta to offer users an affirmative, opt-in consent option to being tracked. And an opt-in, which would require Meta to convince users that its targeted ads were desirable, doesn’t seem to be on the table anywhere.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
State Privacy Legislation Tracker
https://iapp.org/resources/article/us-state-privacy-legislation-tracker/
California Privacy Protection Agency https://cppa.ca.gov