JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
An Early Look at the 2024 Race for the Republican Presidential Nomination
Brief #77 – Elections & Politics Policy
by Ian Milden
The race for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination has started to develop.
The Week That Was: Global News in Review
Brief #76 – Foreign Policy
by Abran C
This is our 7th in a series designed to help our readers catch up on international events of the past week.
Help Wanted: Seeking Support for Unaccompanied Children
Brief #147 – Social Justice Policy
by Steve Piazza
This is the second part of a report on how child labor laws are failing to protect minors from work related abuses and the implications that has for their education.
Two Judges Have Opposing Rulings, and Backgrounds, on Abortion Rights
Brief #161 – Health & Gender Policy
by Geoffrey Small
Last month two federal judges issued contradictory rulings on the abortion medication mifepristone, the most commonly used procedure in the United States.
Navigating the Complexities of Content Moderation: Strategies and Challenges in the Digital Age
Brief #87 – Technology Policy
by Inijah Quadri
Content moderation is the process of monitoring and filtering user-generated content to ensure that it adheres to a platform’s guidelines and community standards.
Can a UN Treaty Curtail Industrial Revolution on the High Seas?
Brief #154 – Environmental Policy
by Todd J. Broadman
Oceans make up over 70% of the Earth’s surface and contain 95% of total habitat – only 9% of which has been classified. Most of that watery habitat lies unprotected from human exploitation.
An Early Overview of the 2024 U.S. Senate Races
Brief #76 – Elections & Politics Policy
by Ian Milden
One-third of the U.S. Senate will be up for election in 2024. This Brief will provide an overview of what seats will be up this cycle, and where each party has strengths and weaknesses for this cycle’s elections.
The Battle Over Gig Worker Protections Heads to the California Supreme Court and the US Senate
Brief #86 – Technology Policy
by Mindy Spatt
Rideshare companies have won the latest round in their fight to stop California’s gig worker protection legislation from becoming law.
Justice Thomas’ Ethical Lapses Illustrate The Need of An Ethical Code for the Supreme Court
Brief #204 – Civil Rights Policy
by Rodney A. Maggay
Except for the United States Supreme Court, members of the federal bench (judges, magistrates) are bound by the Code of Conduct for United States Judges.
Important Elections in the First Half of 2023
Important Elections in the First Half of 2023
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #50 | By: Ian Milden | January 17, 2023
Header photo taken from: RFCP (.org)
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more elections and politics policy briefs from the top dashboard
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
While the start of the presidential race tends to get most of the election coverage around this time of year, there are a couple of important elections in the early months of 2023. This brief will discuss two of these races and why they matter.
Policy Analysis
Photo taken from: NBC12 (.com)
Virginia’s 4th Congressional District
After Congressman Donald McEachin (D-VA) passed away on November 29th, a special election was ordered to fill the vacancy in Virginia’s 4th congressional district. The special election will be held on February 21st. Democrats nominated state senator Jennifer McClellan. The Republicans nominated Leon Benjamin. Benjamin was the Republican nominee who lost to McEachin in 2020 and 2022. Early voting has already started and will go on until February 18th.
Virginia’s 4th Congressional district is based around Richmond. McEachin won over 60% of the vote in 2022, so this is a district that Democrats should be heavily favored to win. Special elections tend to feature low voter turnout rates, so margins can vary wildly based on who shows up to vote. The margins in special elections can provide indications of what voters might do in upcoming elections. For example, Democrats started to overperform expectations in special elections in 2022 after the Supreme Court overturned Roe vs Wade, which foreshadowed Democrats performing relatively well in the 2022 mid-term elections.
If Democrats retain the seat in Virginia’s 4th district, it won’t give them the House majority, but it will provide Democrats with a little more leverage in negotiations by giving Republicans a smaller margin for error on party-line votes. Having this seat filled by a Democratic incumbent will also be one less seat for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee to worry about in 2024. Democrats should hold this seat, but sometimes crazy things happen in special elections.
Photo taken from: PBS Wisconsin
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Wisconsin voters will also get to vote on February 21st. Instead of voting for members of Congress, they will get to vote for state judicial officials. This includes filling an open seat on the state supreme court.
Justice Patience Roggensack has decided to retire after serving two ten-year terms. Roggensack was part of a four-member conservative majority on the court. Since the court has seven seats, the newly elected Justice will determine the ideological balance of the court. The term of Justice Roggensack expires at the end of July.
Four candidates are running for state Supreme Court Justice. The top two finishers in the non-partisan election on February 21st will advance to the general election on April 4th. The four candidates are former state Supreme Court Justice Dan Kelly, Waukesha County Judge Jennifer Dorow, Milwaukee County Judge Janet Protasiewicz, and Dane County Judge Everett Mitchell. Kelly and Dorow are campaigning as conservatives. Judge Protasiewicz and Judge Mitchell are expected to join the progressive justices on the court if they are elected.
The state Supreme Court would have the ability to rule on legal disputes related to the elections in Wisconsin. This includes Gerrymandering cases, which have a significant impact on the partisan distribution of seats in the U.S. House and the state legislature. The state Supreme Court also can rule on state policy decisions that are challenged in court. This authority can lead to major changes in public policy. Areas of public policy they can rule on include (but are not limited to) abortion, labor, and public health.
The state Supreme Court has the power to resolve disputes between the Governor and the state legislature. Given the conservative majority on the court, most of these disputes have been resolved in favor of the Republican-controlled state legislature rather than the Democratic Governor.
For example, the conservative majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled against Governor Tony Evers’ emergency orders related to the Covid-19 pandemic. This significantly limited the governor’s authority to make public health rules to combat the pandemic. If Judge Protasiewicz or Judge Mitchell is elected, the state Supreme Court would likely reach a different verdict in similar cases in the future.
Unlike the special election in Virginia, I don’t have an indication of who is likely to win. It will be a low-turnout election due to the timing of the election and the offices on the ballot. While the race is technically non-partisan, political party organizations in the state get involved in turning out voters for their preferred candidates. This race is worth keeping an eye on because it would have implications for any legal disputes about upcoming elections in the state.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Wisconsin Democratic Party
Jennifer McClellan for Congress
https://jennifermcclellan.com/
Judge Protasiewicz’s Campaign Website
https://www.janetforjustice.com/
Judge Mitchell’s Campaign Website
The Week That Was #2
The Week That Was #2
Foreign Policy Brief #165 | By: Abran C | January 18, 2023
Header photo taken from: Ina Fassbener / AFP
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.
Photo taken from: Evaristo Sa / Getty Images
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Invasion of the Brazilian Congress
On January 8, 2022 thousands of far right insurrectionists stormed the Brazilian congress and supreme court in an event reminiscent of the January 6, 2021 capitol attack in the United States.
In addition to the similar time of year, the reason behind the insurrection in Brazil is eerily similar to the attack on the US capital in that supporters of the outgoing president claim the election was stolen. Rioters attempted to remove left-wing President Lula Da Silva from office. The insurrectionist made it into the inner sanctum of what should have been one of Brazil’s most secure locations, leaving a trail of destruction in their wake. Many have sinced questioned how such a politically sensitive building could have been left so exposed.
Like in the US, the warning signs were apparent for some time, with election deniers mobilizing on social media ahead of the attack and former President Bolsonaro claiming foul play. Celso Amorim, Brazil’s former defense minister, said he was struggling to fathom how security forces and intelligence agencies had failed to detect or stop the threat.
The mob ultimately failed to reach the offices of President Lula. Brazil’s former Minister of Justice and Public Security under Bolsonaro, Anderson Torres, was in charge of security in Brasilia during the invasion, and has been arrested on suspicion of “omission” and “connivance”. Former President Bolsonaro himself has been on vacation in Florida and has yet to return to Brazil or comment on the recent attack by his supporters.
Serbia and Kosovo tension
Last week NATO denied Serbia’s request for NATO troops to be deployed in the Balkans for the first time since the end of the Bosnian war in 1999. Serbia requested to deploy troops in Kosovo in response to clashes between Kosovo authorities and Serbs in Kosovo’s northern region.
Last month the Serbian army was put on high alert as tensions continued to increase between Serbs and Albanians. Serbia does not recognise Kosovo as an independent state, nor do the ethnic Serbs who live there. Tensions have become particularly high over the past few months, with ethnic Serbs withdrawing all co-operation with Kosovo authorities and blocking crossing points between Serbia and Kosovo.
Tensions between Belgrade and Pristina have ebbed and flowed since Kosovo’s declaration of independence from Serbia in 2008. Kosovo, which has an overwhelmingly ethnic Albanian majority, broke away from Serbia after a war in 1998-99.
Photo taken from: Armend Nimani / AFP via Getty Images
(click or tap to enlargen)
After the most recent tensions that arose due to alleged reports of ethnic Serbs coming under attack NATO peacekeepers have faced calls from Belgrade to protect Serbs, as well as demands from Pristina to dismantle the barricades between the two countries. NATO has rejected these calls from either side thus far.
Climate Standoff at Lützerath, Germany
Photo taken from: Life Gate
Germany suffering from an energy crisis as a result of the war in Ukraine has had to make consessions opposing its climate goals for 2030. The small town of Lützerath was mostly abandoned after 1000 police were involved in an eviction operation. The town has become a battle ground between activists and the government and a symbol in the fight against climate change. For the past two years activists have attempted to protect the village from being bulldozed to make way for the opencast lignite mine.
German police in riot gear have begun removing protestors from the village and property belonging to RWE, the company which owns the village’s land and houses.The company has the backing of the provincial government. RWE has said it’s necessary to mine the large lignite reserves under the town, to help address Germany and Europe’s sky-rocketing energy prices amid Russia’s war on Ukraine. Still several hundred climate activists moved into the town of Luetzerath weeks ago to resist further mining and it is expected that thousands more will join the protests.
The Ukraine Crisis: Situation Update: #18
The Ukraine Crisis: Situation Update: #18
Foreign Policy Brief #164 | By: Abran C | January 13, 2023
Header photo taken from: The Associated Press
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more foreign policy briefs from the top dashboard
This is the 18th in a special U.S. RESIST NEWS series that updates our readers on the latest developments in Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Photo taken from: EPA-EFE / MYKOLA TYMCHENKO
Battle for Soledar
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
As we approach the one year anniversary of the invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022, Ukranian troops are currently entrenched in heavy fighting in the small salt mining town of Soledar. The town lies at the center of the Donbas region, the vast eastern part Ukraine of which Russia has annexed as its own territory late last year. The two sides involved in the fighting for this town, however, are not both official military forces, rather, on the Russian side it is the infamous Wagner mercenary group fighting to capture the town.
The military significance of Soledar itself is minimal, but it is only a few miles northeast of the larger city of Bakhmut, which Moscow has struggled to capture for months, and has become perhaps the most contested city in the on the eastern front. Capturing Soledar would provide an eastern entry into Bakhmut. and would be a symbolic PR win for the private military Wagner group and its owner- Russian oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin- who has criticized the defense ministry’s management of the war in Ukraine and is likely attempting to position himself for a larger role in the war
Due to the intense fighting and non-state actors involved, getting clear and definitive information has been difficult. Yevgeny Prigozhin of the Wagner group on Tuesday said that Wagner mercenaries were in total control of the town, yet the Kremlin had not claimed victory itself. Meanwhile Serhii Cherevatyi, spokesman for the Eastern group of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, said that Ukrainian forces were supplying troops with ammunition and food, describing the situation as “under control”. Conflicting claims from either side has been common throughout this conflict and with the addition of private military contractors it is likely information will become more obscure.
The Russian armed forces have had nothing to claim as victory since the beginning of July. In recent months, they have had to retreat in both Kharkiv to the north and Kherson in south. The capture of Soledar, despite its lack of importance strategically, and a path to the city of Bakhmut would therefore be something to uphold as a positive development in the Russian war effort that has until now been a near complete failure. Conversely, for Ukrainians, the ability to continue to hold out and repel Russian attacks in this small town claimed by the Kremlin as part of Russian territory as we near the one-year anniversary will represent a major victory.
New Year New War tactics
Western powers have promised to begin sending more advanced weaponry to Ukraine. France, Germany, and the US announced on Wednesday that they would be sending light armored fighting vehicles to the battlefield. These weapons are a sign of increasing armaments being sent to Ukraine, and though beneficial to the Ukranian effort, they are not likely to beat back the invading army and retake the Eastern territories lost in the Russian annexation.
Ukrainian officials have been pushing for more heavy weaponry but Western powers have been hesitant in sending them.There are debates among officials about the extent to which Ukraine should be armed by the US, with some feeling more advanced weaponry may help bring about a swifter end to the now protracted war, and others believing arming Ukraine will only prolong fighting.
There is of course also the danger that arming Ukraine with advanced weaponry would be seen as a provocation by Russia and cause an even further increase in hostilities.
Map taken from: Institute for the Study of War
(click or tap to enlargen)
Russia in its latest military shake up has appointed Valery Gerasimov as overall commander of the war. Gerasimov played key role in Russia’s seizure of Crimea in 2014 and in Russia’s military support for President Bashar al-Assad in the Syrian Civil War. The Kremlin had recently appointed a new commander in October but in light of a host of defeats by the Russian army the previous commander was demoted.
Gerasimov’s appointment is a sign the Kremlin seeks to intensify the war and reverse the course of its string of defeats. Whatever course of actions are taken in the coming weeks and months, 2023 thus far seems to be a year that will see continued conflict in Ukraine.
Who Will Be the Gatekeepers in 2023?
Who Will Be the Gatekeepers in 2023?
Technology Policy Brief #78 | By: Mindy Spatt | January 11, 2023
Header photo taken from: Sitra
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more technology policy briefs from the top dashboard
Supreme Court Will Consider Whether Social Media Companies Should Be Liable for Damage Caused Through Their Platforms and More Closely Regulated. Would the Government Be a Better Gatekeeper Than Elon Musk?
Photo taken from: Dado Ruvic | Reuters, BuzzMachine
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
If anything is clear from Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter, it is that he is ill equipped to be the arbiter of who or what should be banned from the platform. He appears to be the last person on earth anyone would choose for the job. Former CEO Jack Dorsey had no particular qualifications to do so, but his decisions didn’t garner the publicity or public dismay Musk’s have. And if not Musk, or Mark Zuckerberg, who was notoriously late to the Trump/Russia party on Facebook, then who?
Social media companies currently operate with no responsibility for the content being distributed on their platforms. A federal law, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, shields them from liability for third party content.
It also allows them to take “any good faith action to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable.” So whatever efforts Zuckerberg, Musk and other social media giants have made to keep hate speech or other harmful content off of their platforms have been purely voluntary. And not enough, judging by recent lawsuits by the Social Media Victims Law Center, which describes itself as “a legal resource for parents of children harmed by social media addiction and abuse.”
The Center is suing Tik Tok for wrongful death on behalf of the families of 8-year-old Lalani Erika Walton of Temple, Texas, and 9-year-old Arriani Jaileen Arroyo of Milwaukee, Wisconsin who both died after participating in TikTok’s “Blackout Challenge” which encourages users to choke themselves to the point of unconsciousness.
The group has also filed a suit against Snap, Inc. on behalf of the families of eight teenagers and young adults across six states, all of whom died after taking fentanyl-laced pills purchased from drug dealers they connected with on Snapchat. The suit alleges that Snapchat’s unique disappearing message features, “encourage, enable, and facilitate illegal and deadly drug sales of counterfeit pills containing lethal doses of fentanyl to minors and young adults.”
Although the Center notes on its website that Section 230 needs to be changed, their lawsuits are based on a products liability theory, alleging that the algorithms or other elements of the platforms’ delivery systems are dangerous and defective.
Nothing talks like money, so if these actions are successful they are sure to spark major changes in the industry. And two cases currently before the Supreme Court may signal an end to the broad protections of Section 230.
Photo taken from: Bloomberg
Both cases blame social media for ISIS’s ability to recruit and enable terrorists. In Gonzalez v. Google, the family of an ISIS terrorism victim alleges that YouTube’s algorithms make it easy for ISIS find new recruits, and that You Tube should be held liable for the result of its algorithms regardless of Section 230’s protections. Lower courts have issued conflicting opinions on these questions.
In Twitter, Inc. v. Taamneh, the court will consider whether “a defendant that provides generic, widely available services to all its numerous users and “regularly” works to detect and prevent terrorists from using those services knowingly provided substantial assistance” under anti-terrorism laws by not taking action to prevent such use.
The court could resolve these cases by deciding to treat social media companies as common carriers. Lower courts and Justice Thomas have indicated support for this approach, treating the companies similarly to public utilities providing communications services.
In that case, the FCC, more experienced in stopping obscenity than viral suicide videos, would be providing guidance. And likely not go as far as some advocates would like. The nonprofit media advocacy group Media Justice has a set of recommended guidelines for social media companies to follow to “stop amplifying the worst content on their platforms” on their website https://www.changetheterms.org.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Robert Reich, Do we want social media companies to decide whether Kanye West gets a platform? The Guardian, Oct. 12, 2022.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/oct/12/kanaye-west-twitter-instagram-robert-reich
John Villasenor , Social Media Companies and Common Carrier Status, A Primer, Thursday, October 27, 2022, Brookings.edu.
Damar Hamlin’s Recovery: What a U.S. Worker Deserves
Damar Hamlin’s Recovery: What a U.S. Worker Deserves
Health and Gender Policy Brief #152 | By: Geoffrey Small | January 8, 2023
Header photo taken from: the Buffalo Bills Press Conference
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more health & gender policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Penn State Health
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
On January 2nd, 2023 NFL Buffalo Bills safety Damar Hamlin suffered from cardiac arrest after a tackle to the chest during a Monday-night football game with the Cincinnati Bengals. As he laid motionless on the field for approximately ten minutes, first responders applied CPR, an AED (automated external defibrillation), oxygen, and an intravenous solution in order to prevent brain damage that can occur after cardiac arrest. Medical experts have speculated that Hamlin suffered from Commotio cordis, which can happen when trauma to the chest disrupts the electrical charge to the heart.
The first responders managed to restore his heartbeat on the field. Approximately a half hour after his cardiac arrest, Hamlin was transported to the University of Cincinnati Medical Center by ambulance. He was reported in critical condition after his arrival and was intubated. Hamlin later regained consciousness on January 5th and had the breathing tube removed the following day. His medical team eventually reported that Hamlin had full control over his bodily functions and feeling in all of his extremities.
Without a quick response from highly trained medical staff in the NFL and the University of Cincinnati Medical Center, this event may have resulted in severe brain damage or death. Hamlin is a professional athlete employed in the NFL, where highly trained medical staff and technology are required to be on standby during games, practices, and facility-based training. If medical experts concur that Hamlin suffered from Commotio cordis, it may also be concluded that this event was a freak accident, which happened to a highly trained professional athlete at the pinnacle of his health.
Comparatively, most U.S. workplaces do not have the same level of medical response that teams in the NFL provide. However, cardiac arrest is far more common with the average U.S. worker. Exploring the data related to cardiac arrest, and the federal regulations when responding to an event in the work place, may offer some insight into how our system can change to give U.S. workers similar support that was provided to Hamlin.
Policy Analysis
According to the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, brain cells begin to die after five minutes of oxygen deprivation, also known as cerebral hypoxia. That is why medical experts agree that a trained CPR and first-aid responder may be the difference between life or death during cardiac arrest. The American Heart Association states that OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) reports 10,000 cardiac arrests in U.S. workplaces annually.
Only 45.7% of people who experience Out of Hospital Cardiac Arrest receive the immediate help they need before professional medical help arrives. Approximately 51% of U.S. workers can’t locate an AED, a device that was instrumental in restoring Hamlin’s heartbeat. That number rises to 66% in the hospitality industry. 55% of U.S. workers don’t receive first-aid, CPR, and AED training from their employer.
OSHA does not require employers to provide first-aid or CPR training. OSHA does not have regulations that require U.S workplaces to have AEDs. This is in spite of the fact that 9 out of 10 victims of cardiac arrest who receive a shock within the first five minutes from an AED live.
Infographic taken from: AHA Mediagenic
(click or tap to enlargen)
Infographic taken from: AHA Journals
(click or tap to enlargen)
Hamlin’s cardiac arrest has highlighted the benefits of having employees trained in first-aid, CPR, and AED administration. It’s the difference between life or death.
Having trained CPR employees and an AED on-site is beneficial, despite the lack of federal regulations requiring employers to have them. Also, 65% of employees surveyed by the American Heart Association would view their employers more positively if they provided CPR training.
Donating to the American Heart Association can help spread awareness that government regulations need to improve. Also, please donate to Damar Hamlin’s toy drive.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
https://cpr.heart.org/en/resources/contact-cpr-and-first-aid?form=FUNELYZXFBW
Congress Passes Electoral Count Reform Act of 2022 To Deter Future Election Manipulation Schemes
Congress Passes Electoral Count Reform Act of 2022 To Deter Future Election Manipulation Schemes
Civil Rights Policy Brief #199 | By: Rodney A. Maggay | January 9, 2023
Header photo taken from: Tom Williams / Getty Images
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more civl rights policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: @ POTUS via Twitter
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
On January 6, 2021 rioters supporting then – President Donald J. Trump broke through the barricades and stormed the U.S. Capitol building.
During the breach of the Capitol building Congress had been in session opening official electoral ballots submitted by each state for the 2020 presidential election and certifying the totals.
Following the General Election in November 2020 and the voting of the Electoral College in December 2020, the certifying of the electoral votes in Congress was the final step to make the 2020 election results official. President Joe Biden had defeated then – President Donald Trump 306 – 232 in the Electoral College with 270 required to win. However, supporters of President Trump had bought into President Trump’s “Big Lie” that he had actually won the election and that Joe Biden and his associates had somehow stolen the election from him.
It was later revealed that President Trump and other public figures had hatched a scheme to overturn the election. Their plan focused on Vice – President Mike Pence’s role presiding over the electoral count session in his official capacity as Vice – President. What President Trump wanted to do was try to get Vice – President Pence to refuse to accept Electoral College ballots submitted by states in order to sow confusion on the results.
If this resulted in no clear winner in the Electoral College vote, the President would then be selected by the House of Representatives with each state getting one vote regardless of the number of Representatives the state had. With fifty (50) states total, all a candidate needed was for twenty – six (26) states to vote for a candidate, as is required under the Twelfth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
President Trump’s plan to “throw the presidential election to the House” was based on ambiguities found in the Electoral Count Act of 1887. That federal statute governs the process for how a president and vice – president are elected and how ballots from the Electoral College will be counted by Congress. But the law was not clear on many points which gave an opening for President Trump and his supporters to try and manipulate the election to their liking.
In response to the gray areas found in this particular law, bipartisan members of Congress worked to clarify the procedures and to close gaps in the law so that no one could exploit those vulnerabilities again. In July 2022, the Senate introduced these changes in the Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act of 2022, which received wide bipartisan support. The House of Representatives responded with their own improvements with the Presidential Reform Act of 2022.
That passed in the chamber by a vote of 229 – 203. After the differences in the bills were resolved, the bill was included in the 2023 Omnibus Appropriations bill, which was signed into law by President Biden on December 29, 2022. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE
Policy Analysis
The tragedy of the Electoral Count Act of 1887 (ECA) is that it was intended to provide the steps and process as to how Congress counts electoral ballots to elect the president and vice – president but was instead used by Donald Trump and his allies to try and subvert a free and fair election.
Because the law was written so poorly, it gave Trump and his associates an opening to try and keep Trump in the White House when he had lost the election. Without clarifying what certain terms and clauses meant the law provided that the vice – president would “preside” over the session that counts the electoral college ballots, that if a state “failed to make a choice” that it could designate another alternate election and that a Member of Congress could object to a ballot if the vote was not “regularly given.”
The choice of these words and the lack of any guidance allowed these terms to be subject to various interpretations. Luckily, Congress stepped in and clarified what meanings certain terms would have while adding new safeguards.
The changes with the new law are significant. First, to prevent a future incident where a vice – president might be bullied into not accepting a slate of electors as President Trump tried to do to Vice – President Pence, the law now clarifies that the role of the Vice – President in presiding over the session opening the electoral ballots is simply a “ministerial” role. Under the law now, the sitting vice – president presides over the joint session of Congress and has no ability to determine, accept or reject the slate of electors.
The slate delivered to the session is for the Vice – President to merely announce and nothing more. The interpretation put forth by Trump that the Vice – President could refuse to accept a slate not to his liking can no longer occur.
Photo taken from: Peter Afriyie
Second, the new law raises the threshold for Congress to object and debate whether to accept a slate of electors from a state. As seen on January 6, 2021, all that was needed was for one Member of Congress to object before Congress would debate on the slate of electors. Now, that threshold has been raised. Both houses of Congress would have to have one – fifth of the members of each house object.
In the Senate that would mean twenty Senators would have to object. And, in the House of Representatives that would mean eighty-seven Representatives would have to object, too. This would prevent one member from objecting for frivolous reasons and ensure that there is widespread support if there is a legitimate reason to object to accepting a state’s slate of electors.
And finally, the new bill streamlines the submission of electors to Congress from each state. The law recognizes that the state’s governor is the only one who can submit the certificate of ascertainment of a state’s electors and no other state official. This was included to prevent a “fake” slate of electors from being submitted as had been mentioned as a scheme from some states. And the law also provides for quicker judicial review by prioritizing suits from candidates who may want to challenge a certification of electors with a direct and quicker appeal to the Supreme Court.
The law also strikes from the statutes a law that allowed states to declare a “failed election.” All of these reforms are now law and significantly diminish, if not out right eliminate, the ambiguities and gaps in the law that President Trump and his allies tried to use to overturn a free and fair election. 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
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) – non – profit group’s statement on support for the Electoral Count Reform Act of 2022.
Protect Democracy – non – profit group’s infopage on the Electoral Count Reform Act of 2022.
The True Color of Efforts to Strike Down Affirmative Action
The True Color of Efforts to Strike Down Affirmative Action
Education Policy Brief #59 | By: Steve Piazza | January 7, 2022
Header photo taken from: Julian J. Giordano
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more education policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Shutterstock, Rutgers.edu
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The U.S. Supreme Court recently heard arguments relating to the use of Affirmative Action, or policies designed to reduce discrimination during the college admission process. The focus was on two cases: Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, No. 20-1199, and Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina, No. 21-707.
Lower courts had previously ruled in favor of the two universities stating they do not use race as the deciding factor, but attorneys for Students for Fair Admissions, a group that has long been advocating for the eliminating Affirmative Action altogether, appealed.
Though no USSC ruling is expected before June of this year, the questioning by the Court’s majority conservative justices might be viewed as a signal that the longstanding law’s days of anti-discriminatory protections may be nearing its end.
Policy Analysis
The central question in the case is this: Is race being used as the deciding factor when making decisions about college applicants? But based on statements, questions, and answers during oral arguments, clearly what’s at issue is this larger question: Should race be used at all?
The session began with the central question itself, but the nearly three hour session mostly reflected the skepticism of the conservative justices towards the need for anti-discrimination protections, while the three liberal justices argued for the sake of them.
From the moment that the oral arguments began with petitioners’ attorney Patrick Strawbridge stating, “Racial classifications are wrong,” it seemed that lines were drawn. Strawbridge went on to assert that the policy at UNC is reducible to one indicator, race, and that application points go only to non-whites or Asians, claims that had already been disproved according to lower court records.
By then the focus turned to the value not only of such decision making, but segregation itself. At one point, Justice Thomas stated that though he’s familiar with the word “diversity,” he doesn’t have a clue what it means, and then went on to question the educational benefits of it.
The questions from the conservative side continued to avoid the central question consistently. Perhaps it’s because the question whether race can be used as a single criterion has already been answered in precedents set back in Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003), and Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978).
The fact that arguing semantics via terms such as diversity, permissible and impermissible classification, race-neutral alternatives, etc. still exists says a lot about where we are as a society right now. Even questioning the advantages of Affirmative Actions seems contrived and partial. When three liberal judges have to explain to the rest of their colleagues that Affirmative Action programs have resulted in advancements in leadership and the socio-economic welfare of millions across the country, it seems that the conservative justices are peeking a little too much above the blindfold.
Photo taken from: The Chronicle of Higher Education
(click or tap to enlargen)
Photo taken from: Grinnel.edu
(click or tap to enlargen)
The downside of removing Affirmative Action has already been seen. Since nine states have banned it, research shows that it has affected enrollment for non-white students across the board. For example, a May, 2022 study at UCLA shows that in states where bans were implemented, there was a drop in public medical school enrollment of more than 30% of students identified with underrepresented racial and minority groups.
It should be noted that the larger question is not solely about attitudes regarding racial equality, as they are about the continued inequitable lack of access to resources for students at the K-12 level. Truly, judicial procedures must be about results and process and not seen as an easy way out for those opposed to Affirmative Action.
A law such as Affirmative Action is in place to deter. If it has any impact at all, and it has, it’s still only taking care of symptoms of something underlying it. It doesn’t make racism go away, particularly when those attitudes have existed in this country since its founding. If that seems hyperbolic, think of all the recent turmoil that surfaced once civil rights voting protections were relaxed in 2013.
If Affirmative Action is defeated, the negative effect on admissions by people of color across the country will most likely return to the spotlight. Again. And again. Spotlights are good, but not if they have previously been in place, and over time too many spotlights tend to overlap and hide the racial injustices they’re attempting to expose.
The end result of the demise of Affirmative Action will once again be another systemic failure that will cause so many students, and eventually employment seekers, to suffer.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
This is a link to the entire transcript of the oral arguments by the USSC on 10.31.22: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2022/21-707_9o6b.pdf
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has provided support in this and many other related cases. To learn more about ACLU efforts regarding Affirmative Action, click here:
https://www.aclu.org/issues/racial-justice/affirmative-action
Another organization that has been advocating for equitability and fairness is the American Association for Access Equity and Diversity (AAAED), whose information can be found here: https://www.aaaed.org/aaaed/About_Us.asp
Netanyahu’s New Coalition Government is Jeopardizing Israeli Democracy
Netanyahu’s New Coalition Government is Jeopardizing Israeli Democracy
Foreign Policy Brief #163 | By: Ian Milden | January 4, 2023
Header photo taken from: The Associated Press
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more foreign policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: GPO / Kobi Gideon
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
After nearly two months of negotiating with the far-right religious parties, Benjamin Netanyahu reached an agreement with them to become Prime Minister again. Netanyahu made major concessions to become the new Prime Minister. While Netanyahu appears to have successfully shielded himself from the criminal justice system, the policy decisions that his coalition of his supporters are making may imperil the future of democracy in Israel.
Policy Analysis
After an early November election, Benjamin Netanyahu spent nearly two months negotiating with far-right parties and religious conservative parties to form a government. Conservative voters turned out at higher-than-expected rates, which allowed Netanyahu’s Likud Party and his allies to win a slim majority of seats in the Knesset (Israeli parliament). The far-right parties and religious conservative parties decided to use their leverage to extract significant concessions from Netanyahu. These concessions were both on policy and positions within Netanyahu’s government.
There are several aspects of Netanyahu’s deal with his conservative allies that prompted significant concern for members of the Israeli public as well as the international community. There are proposals to expand Israeli settlements in the West Bank, which will likely increase conflict with the Palestinians. The United States is concerned enough to send National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan to Israel to discuss the issue with the new Israeli Government.
Netanyahu appointed Itamar Ben-Gvir, who has advocated for Israeli soldiers to be immunized in cases related to shooting Palestinians, to be the Security Minister. This appointment has caused great concern within the Israeli military. The retiring leaders of the Israeli military expressed concern to Netanyahu that Ben-Gvir could drag the Israeli military into domestic political disputes.
Many of Netanyahu’s allies outside of his party are pushing for proposals that would weaken legal protections for members of the LGBTQ community, Palestinians, and other minority groups. These proposals have received pushback from the Israeli tech sector and members of the secular middle class. The religious conservative allies of Netanyahu are pushing for increased funding for Orthodox Jewish students, who do not serve in the military or work. Existing funding for these students is unpopular with the Israeli public.
While all of these are concerning developments, the proposals by Netanyahu’s allies to weaken the Israeli judicial system have implications for the future of democracy in Israel. The proposal would prevent sitting Prime Ministers from facing prosecution for a range of offenses, including the types of corruption charges that Netanyahu is currently facing.
Photo taken from: Maya Alleruzzo / Associated Press
The proposal would also change the structure of the Attorney General’s office to make most of the top officials in that office political appointees, rather than having officials selected based on merit. The Attorney General’s office is currently the office in charge of prosecuting Netanyahu on the corruption charges.
Netanyahu’s judicial proposals would also severely restrict the Supreme Court’s ability to engage in judicial review. Judicial review is the power of the courts to review laws passed by the legislature and strike them down if they violate Israel’s Basic Laws (the document in Israeli politics that protects many civil rights and freedoms).
Judicial review is an important power for the judicial system in republic systems of government because it gives the judicial system the ability to check the potential misuse of power by the legislature. Members of the Israeli far-right parties want to curtail this because the Supreme Court has used judicial review to strike down several laws that the far-right parties supported.
If the Israeli government moves forward on the proposals to significantly alter the judicial system, the Biden Administration and other Israeli allies may take steps to alter Israeli behavior. Preventing and reversing countries’ attacks on democratic norms and systems has been a priority for the Biden administration. Changes to the judicial branch’s power in Israeli would not go unnoticed by the Biden Administration.
It is still possible that some of these proposals will not become law. Some members of the Likud Party were unhappy with the concessions that Netanyahu made to his coalition partners, particularly with some of the cabinet positions he conceded to them. Some of the policy proposals that Netanyahu’s coalition partners want to pass are deeply unpopular with the Israeli public.
It would only take a few disgruntled members of Netanyahu’s party to block any proposal from becoming law. If a significant and lasting divide opens within the Likud Party, that could cause the coalition to collapse and force the country into another election. While there are currently no public signs of a significant rebellion within the Likud Party, it is something that could occur in the future as Netanyahu will need to put some of the controversial policy decisions up for a vote to keep his coalition partners happy.
The Latest Spill Finds Politicians Ankle Deep in Tar Sands Oil
The Latest Spill Finds Politicians Ankle Deep in Tar Sands Oil
Environment Policy Brief #151 | By: Todd J. Broadman | January 3, 2023
Header photo taken from: TC Energy
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more environmental policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Uncredited / AP / REX / Shutterstock
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Since the beginning of its operations in 2010, the Keystone pipeline has experienced 22 oil spills totaling 26,000 barrels of tar sands oil leaked into the surrounding land and water. The pipeline traverses approximately 2,700 miles, starting from the tar sands of Alberta, Canada and terminating at refinery locations in the Midwest and Oklahoma. The pipeline’s owner and operator is TC Energy.
The most recent leak occurred on December 7, 2022, and spilled an estimated 14,000 barrels of oil. As each barrel is the equivalent of 42 gallons, this a record 600,000-gallon spill, the biggest spill on US soil over the last decade.
Government agencies responsible for the pipeline’s regulation and spill cleanup efforts are: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), as well as state and local agencies. The permit to operate the pipeline was issued by PHMSA. The pipeline was operating at 80 percent of the maximum recommended rate – actually, above the maximum 72 percent rate, and the exception in this case was granted to TC Energy because the pipeline was made “using higher-grade steel.”
The pipeline does not carry conventional oil, it carries a crude tar sands oil termed bitumen, far heavier than conventional oil. Bitumen needs to be thinned to allow for flow through the pipeline and that is done by incorporating a lighter gas called a diluent. When this mixture is exposed to the environment in the event of a spill though, its chemical composition reverts back to its original thick consistency.
From research done in a very large 2010 spill which took place in Michigan, the extent of environmental damage and “special risks” caused by bitumen were detailed. According to scientists, “The response becomes more complex because there are few proven techniques in the responder ‘tool box’ for detection, containment, and recovery.” In that Kalamazoo River spill, it proved easier to dredge and remove entire rocks than to attempt to scrape off the bitumen coating.
Fearing just this kind of incident or worse, President Joe Biden cancelled the proposed pipeline extension, Keystone XL, in 2021. TC Energy is still pressing for this additional line which would pipe the sludge directly through Montana, and then to South Dakota and Nebraska. Matt Casale, director with U.S. PIRG, said, “The latest spill is another tragic reminder of the costs of our reliance on fossil fuels.”
Policy Analysis
The construction permits for the Keystone extension “XL” were revoked by the Obama administration only to be approved by Trump. Biden, soon after being elected, again revoked the XL permits. Throughout the process though, advocates were advertising Keystone as the “safest pipeline ever built.” When the spills started mounting, the GAO issued a report that said the material failures were the result of “construction issues.”
“It is a lemon,” said Paul Blackburn, an attorney with Bold Alliance specializing in pipeline law. “It’s leaked a remarkable number of times and while there may be certain kinds of specific causes for each leak, the fact that it leaks so often suggests that there may be some underlying systemic reasons on what’s going wrong.” One report pointed to substandard steel and a lack of corrosion protection. Land that was not willingly sold to TC Energy for the pipeline was taken through eminent domain along with an access easement.
From a broader perspective, we know that most crude-oil spills originate from rail and truck transport, not from pipelines. The PHMSA points out that there are thousands of spills involving hazardous materials, many on a much larger scale – that involve non-petroleum related chemicals. Even when it is oil, much of that oil is recovered in the remediation efforts.
Beyond the typical demonstrations of political outrage, there are no motions at the federal or state level to halt the flow of bitumen from Canada. “I request that TC Energy provide a formal plan for preventing further oil spills and for remediating the significant damage caused by this most recent incident,” is the reaction of Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J., chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
Photo taken from: Topeka Capital Journal
Along those same tepid lines, there is Senator (D-MA) Ed Markey’s, “enough is enough,” comment. In a letter to TC Energy President and CEO François Poirier, he wrote: “Communities threatened by your pipeline urgently need an explanation of how and why these spills keep happening, and whether your company will continue to put people nationwide and our environment at risk.”
More tangible action comes from Kansas Governor Laura Kelly who is threatening TC Energy’s state property tax exemptions for the pipeline. “I thought we should have done that a long time ago,” Kelly said. Kansas lawmakers had, early on, passed a package of tax benefits in their effort to woo the Keystone pipeline to Kansas. Fines levied on TC Energy have thus far totaled $300,000.
The company’s official communications on this and other spills have been carefully formatted. “We have the people, expertise, training and equipment to mount an effective response and clean-up, and that’s what we’re doing.” Meanwhile, they have gotten the green light to restart the remaining segment of the Keystone pipeline – which runs from Nebraska to Oklahoma – that had been shut down since the Dec. 7 spill.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
https://pirg.org/ is an advocate for the public interest, speaking out for a healthier, safer world.
https://boldalliance.org/ is a network of “small and mighty” groups in rural states working to protect land and water.
https://tarsandsaction.org/ an activist group moved by the 1,253 Americans who went jail to protest Keystone in the biggest civil disobedience action in many years in this country.
Excerpts from Ukrainian President’s Emotional Speech Before US Congress
Excerpts from Ukrainian President’s Emotional Speech Before US Congress
Foreign Policy Brief #162 | By: Yelena Korshunov | December 27, 2022
Header photo taken from: Getty Images
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more foreign policy briefs from the top dashboard
Last week the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, addressed the US Congress in a persuasive, emotional speech highlighting Americans’ support in protecting Ukraine and world democracy. Here are some memorable excerpts from his speech.
Photo taken from: The Hill
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
“Dear Americans, in all states, cities and communities, all those who value freedom and justice, who cherish it as strongly as we Ukrainians in our cities, in each and every family, I hope my words of respect and gratitude resonate in each American heart.”
“Against all odds and doom-and-gloom scenarios, Ukraine didn’t fall. Ukraine is alive and kicking. Thank you. And it gives me good reason to share with you our first, first joint victory: We defeated Russia in the battle for minds of the world. We have no fear, nor should anyone in the world have it. Ukrainians gained this victory, and it gives us courage which inspires the entire world.”
“We have artillery, yes. Thank you. We have it. Is it enough? Honestly, not really. To ensure Bakhmut is not just a stronghold that holds back the Russian Army, but for the Russian Army to completely pull out, more cannons and shells are needed.”
“But we do not complain. We do not judge and compare whose life is easier. Your well-being is the product of your national security; the result of your struggle for independence and your many victories. We, Ukrainians, will also go through our war of independence and freedom with dignity and success.”
“… Together with you [Americans], we’ll put in place everyone who will defy freedom… This will be the basis to protect democracy in Europe and the world over.”
Photo taken from: Getty Images
“Our country is alive and actively fighting Russia, pushing back its troops. Defeating Russia is the battle for minds of the world”
“The restoration of international legal order is our joint task. We need peace, yes. Ukraine has already offered proposals, which I just discussed with President Biden, our peace formula, 10 points which should and must be implemented for our joint security, guaranteed for decades ahead and the summit which can be held.
“Our war with Russia will succeed in uniting the global community to protect freedom and international law” and in making Europe “stronger and more independent than ever”.
“This battle is not only for the territory, for this or another part of Europe. The battle is not only for the life, freedom and security of Ukrainians or any other nation which Russia attempts to conquer. This struggle will define in what world our children and grandchildren will live, and then their children and grandchildren…From the United States to China, from Europe to Latin America, and from Africa to Australia, the world is too interconnected and interdependent to allow someone to stay aside and at the same time to feel safe when such a battle continues.”