JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
It’s Time to Declare Independence from America’s Two Political Parties
U.S. Resist News Op Ed
John Halpin
The parties insist everyone must toe the line and hold the same ideological views. If the parties won’t change, then voters in the middle should just reject them.
Congressional Effort to Regulate Internet Algorithms May Impact Efforts that Support Reproductive Rights
Brief #61 – Technology Policy
By Mindy Spatt
According to a US Surgeon General’s advisory, online misinformation is dangerous to our health. Abortion advocates agree. So does my pregnant daughter whose Tik Tok and Instagram are filled with horror stories of premature births and preeclampsia that just exacerbate the normal anxieties that come with being pregnant. According to a recent LA Times article she is not alone.
Changes in Google Cookie Policy Could Help Improve Consumer Privacy
Brief #60 – Technology
By Christopher Quinn
In 2023 Google Chrome is phasing out third party cookies. What this means is the entire global browser market will no longer track users’ every move across the web. Safari, Firefox and Brave already block third-party cookies by default to protect users’ privacy. Google Chrome currently holds 64.9 percent of the global browsing market.
Analyzing the Implications of the Dissolution of the Israeli Knesset
Brief #140 – Foreign Policy
By Ian Milden
On June 22nd, Prime Minister Naftali Bennett announced plans to dissolve the Knesset, Israel’s parliament. This means that a snap election will be held this fall. This will be the fifth election in Israel in under four years.
The Supreme Court Weakens The Separation of Church and State With High School Football Coach Decision
Brief #190 – Civil Rights
By Rodney A. Maggay
Joseph Kennedy was a football high school coach at a public high school in Bremerton, Washington. During his time as a coach in the Bremerton School District Mr. Kennedy had started a routine where he would pray at the fifty – yard line of the football field at the conclusion of the game.
For a ‘Young’ Country, the U.S. Has an Old and Outdated Constitution
U.S. RESIST NEWS OP-ED
By Alexander Clarkson
The belief that the United States is a uniquely youthful society in contrast to an aging and decadent Europe has become so entrenched that it is rarely questioned. Whether out of politeness or genuine belief, Europeans encountering this recurring trope often turn to their own.
New Tech Regulation Bill Being Considered by Congress American Innovation and Choice Online Act
Brief #59 – Technology
By Christopher Quinn
A major piece of legislation that could re-shape the tech industry is just a few steps away from becoming law.
The American Innovation and Choice Online Act, S.2992 (117) led by Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn) and Chuck Grassley (R- Iowa) would prohibit dominant tech platforms from what its sponsors believe amounts to unfairly ranking their services above those of its rivals. The new law would help small businesses and entrepreneurs by barring Amazon, for instance, from giving preference to its own products.
Preview of US Senate Races in Nevada and North Carolina
Brief #39 – Elections & Politics
By Ian Milden
Control of the U.S. Senate will be up for grabs in the 2022 mid-term elections. Competitive races in key states will determine the balance of power. In this brief, I will preview the US Senate races in Nevada and North Carolina.
Florida’s controversial ‘Don’t Say Gay’ law explained
Brief #53 – Education
By Lynn Waldsmith
It’s not easy having curly hair in Florida. That’s the message the first openly gay class president of Pine View School in Osprey, Florida delivered last month in his commencement address, who used his curly hair as a euphemism for his sexual orientation.
Mental Health Needs of Children and Youth Escalate During COVID-19 Era
Mental Health Needs of Children and Youth Escalate During COVID-19 Era
Education Policy Brief #69 | By: Yelena Korshunov | February 9, 2022
Header photo taken from: TBA
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more education policy briefs from the top dashboard
Author’s Photo
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Before the COVID-19 pandemic, everybody said that Greg was an exceptional basketball player. He was a leader of his middle school basketball team. He shot a basketball at the school court with his friends every single day after class, unless it was pouring rain. When the COVID-19 tsunami came, Greg had to quarantine, as did all of his friends. Both Greg’s parents lost their jobs and struggled to pay daily expenses. Though unemployment and economic impact payments were a great support for the family, their dinners became modest.
Greg spent time mostly in his room chatting with friends, attending remote lessons, and playing video games. There was no basketball anymore – playgrounds and courts were shut then. Greg’s parents stayed home day by day watching the news on TV. And through the closed door of his room Greg heard tensive voices of TV reporters speaking about COVID cases, ventilators, and deaths. Greg didn’t notice the moment when a sticky fear started to shadow him. One day his mom opened Greg’s door calling him for dinner. Greg jumped up from his chair and slammed the door. “Don’t enter my room! No one will enter my room anymore! Never! Just leave your dinner near my door!”
According to the US Department of Education report — Supporting Child and Student Social, Emotional, and Mental Health Needs —emergency department visits related to mental health increased 24% for 5–11-year-olds and 31% for 12–17-year-olds between January and October 2020. Between March and June of 2020, more than 25% of American parents reported that their child experienced declines in mental health and 14% reported increases in behavior problems. In a survey conducted in April and May 2020, one in four youth of ages 13–19 reported an increase in sleep loss due to worry, feeling unhappy or depressed, feeling constantly under strain, and loss of confidence in themselves. A CDC report found one quarter of respondents ages 18–24 had contemplated suicide in the 30 days prior to completing the survey.
Many young people continue to struggle with mental health challenges even upon return to in-person learning. They exhibit poor participation, academic challenges, and behaviors. In young children, mental health issues refer to the developing child’s ability to form relationships with peers and adults, handle and express emotions, explore the environment, and learn. Researchers have found that all children’s experiences, even in infancy, directly affect their social, emotional, and behavioral development.
Policy Analysis
Researchers and educators are developing tools that will rapidly meet the needs of kids and youth who experience mental health issues during the pandemic. Their strategies can be applied, not just to COVID-19 behavioral issues, but to help meet the mental health needs of all children.
For example, supporting students’ social, emotional, and behavioral development at early ages may prevent the need for long-term services and continuous therapy. Efficient therapists apply strategies that parents and caregivers are also encouraged to use for supporting young kids’ proper social-emotional development. Some of these strategies are listening to a child actively and empathetically, speaking with a calm voice, making yourself available when a child wants to talk to you or interact with you (e.g., play, walk, cook together), helping child to understand a consequence of behavior, establishing rules, modeling positive talk and adequate reaction to unpleasant issues, teaching a child to express frustration by words instead of crying or having behavior.
Preventative strategies should also be a priority. School counselors, psychologists, social workers, teachers, and school leaders need to be especially farsighted and extremely attentive to children’s and students’ behavioral change, attitude, and performance. Schools should integrate social-emotional learning in a curriculum, train staff to recognize mental health indicators and properly react to students’ behavior and emotional misbalance, review discipline policy to ensure equity, have zero tolerance for bullying, be culturally responsive, build safe and supportive environment sin the school building, and extend extracurricular activities to meet interests of diverse students’ population.
Photo taken from: U.S. Department of Education
(click or tap to enlargen)
Parents and caregivers can prevent kids’ mental health issues by spending time and enjoying activities together, expressing sincere interest in children’s life and hobbies, welcoming children’s friends and monitoring internet interactions, communicating openly and honestly, discussing family plans and values together, supervising children to facilitate healthy decision making, being aware about child’s school life, and being engaged in school activities.
Averting mental health cases is more efficient than long-term therapeutic processes for already existing mental health issues.
The pandemic has highlighted alarming trends in mental health, and without increasing the number of high-quality mental health services, the increased mental health needs of children and youth will not be met. Even prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, 13–22% of school-aged youth experienced a mental health challenge.
Today, schools returning to in-person learning have new resources in the American Rescue Plan’s Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief fund (ARP ESSER) to support their hard work.
ARP ESSER resources are aimed at increasing the number of social workers, school counselors, school nurses, and school psychologists available to support students.
As President Biden has stated, we have an opportunity to “build back better.” One of the ways to build back better is to integrate the current research and evidence on the importance of prevention and intervention practices to address the mental health needs of children and youth.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Learning to Help Your Child and Your Family
US Department of Education. Supporting Child and Student Social, Emotional, and Mental Health Needs
How the U.S. Should Counter Russian Aggression in Ukraine
How the U.S. Should Counter Russian Aggression in Ukraine
Foreign Policy Brief #142 | By: Abran C | February 9, 2022
Header photo taken from: Atlantic Council
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more foreign policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Reuters
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The crisis and possible looming war in Ukraine have historical implications that include more than just Russia and Ukraine. Though the ties between Russia and Ukraine run far back into history, the conflict also involves the historical involvement of the United States and its NATO allies in Europe. The main issue and the main demand of Russia is the expansion of NATO into Eastern Europe. Ukraine has in the past and continues to seek NATO membership. The U.S. promised during negotiations with the Soviet Union on the reunification of Germany that NATO would not move further Eastward into the Russian sphere of influence.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, multiple Eastern European states and former Soviet satellite countries joined the alliance. In 1999, Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic joined amid much Russian opposition. In 2004 Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia entered into the treaty. Followed by Albania, and Croatia in 2009, Montenegro in 2017, and North Macedonia in 2020. As NATO looked further Eastward towards Ukraine and Georgia, Russian anxieties grew. At the 2008 Bucharest Summit, NATO offered Ukraine eventual membership into the Alliance, drawing strong condemnation from Putin. The current crisis began in 2014 when then Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich rejected closer ties to the EU and embraced Russia, angering the Ukrainian public. In the same year, Russia moved to annex Crimea and as of late 2021, has more than 100,000 troops stationed along the Ukrainian border.
Both leaders of Russia and China met on February 4th, the day of the Opening Ceremony for the Winter Olympics in Xi Jinping’s first meeting with a foreign leader since the beginning of the pandemic. The two issued joint statements opposing the enlargement of NATO and their commitment to their “strategic coordination” internationally. At the same time President Biden met with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz to present a united front against Russian aggression. The two reaffirmed commitments to combat Russian threats to Ukraine and Europe and the German Chancellor stated he could shut down the Nord Stream 2 pipeline which would supply Russian natural gas to Germany and provide a large source of revenue for Russia, something Germany had been unwilling to do.
Last month Biden approved $200 million of “lethal aid” to Ukraine and more recently ordered 3,000 troops additional to be stationed in Poland and Romania. In a news conference last month Biden stated “I think what you’re going to see is that Russia will be held accountable if it invades. And it depends on what it does. It’s one thing if it’s a minor incursion and then we end up having a fight about what to do and not do,” Biden said.
Policy Analysis
So then what should the U.S. and NATO do to counter Russia? The situation has continued to devolve. Peace talks so far have not proved substantive, and each side is attempting to solidify unity with their respective allies. Although the actions taken by Russia in Crimea and along the rest of the Ukrainian border violate international law and are clear acts of aggression, Russian anxiety is not inconceivable. Were Russia or China to establish military bases or place weapons in the United States’ sphere of influence, we certainly would not accept this, and rightfully so. NATO itself was created in order to contain the Soviet Union. After its fall, the alliance continued to expand and included former Soviet Republics. This context matters and must be considered when dealing with and analyzing the Ukrainian situation. Still, Russia should not be able to engage in incursions into Ukraine or Georgia as it has in the past, without consequences. So what can be done? The U.S. has already sent military aid to Ukraine and troops to the region. These actions have not at all changed the Russian stance but may have provided reassurances to Eastern European states. Sending more troops to the region will likely only escalate the situation, a build-up for build-up along borders will not ease tensions as we had seen from East-West standoffs throughout the Cold War.
Photo taken from: Financial Post
(click or tap to enlargen)
As military intervention has already been ruled out, even if Russia were to invade Ukraine, the economic domain should be the primary arena for countering Russia. Economic isolation would put pressure on Russia that may not influence its behavior immediately but down the line could become helpful to stopping further incursions. Russian oligarchs who are a pillar of support for Putin should have assets in the West frozen and held. Pressing Germany to go ahead with its cancelation of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline would also be an effective tactic. The EU investing further in green technology and away from Russian gas would help achieve goals of decarbonization as well as diminishing Russian leverage over Europe.
The U.S. could also attempt to impose an export control ban to stop high-tech U.S. technology such as semiconductors, which are necessary for military weaponry, from reaching Russia. Lastly the U.S. and NATO should take into consideration Russia’s demands and try to find some sort of middle ground even if it means making concessions. Similar to when President Kennedy removed Jupiter missiles from Turkey in order to avoid Soviet weapons in Cuba, today’s leaders should take a lesson from the past and remember that diplomacy cannot be a zero-sum game, and sometimes it’s worth giving up a little in order for gain a lot, and what there is to gain is peace.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
NATO – NATO is committed to the peaceful resolution of disputes. If diplomatic efforts fail, it has the military power to undertake crisis-management operations.
U.S. Department of State – The U.S. Department of State leads America’s foreign policy through diplomacy, advocacy, and assistance by advancing the interests of the American people, their safety, and economic prosperity
Democrats and Republicans Stake Out Positions In Upcoming Supreme Court Confirmation Fight;
Democrats and Republicans Stake Out Positions In Upcoming Supreme Court Confirmation Fight
Civil Rights Policy Brief #181 | By: Rodney A. Maggay | February 2, 2022
Header photo taken from: Roll Call
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more civil policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Bloomberg
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
In February 2016 Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia passed away. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell later issued a statement stating that there would be no hearing or vote on a nominee submitted by President Barack Obama and that the choice should be left to the next President after the upcoming 2016 presidential election. President Obama eventually nominated Chief Judge Merrick Garland. But with the 2016 election still nine months away the Senate took no action on the nomination. After Donald J. Trump won the presidency, he subsequently nominated Neil Gorsuch to the seat that Merrick Garland had been nominated. Gorsuch was eventually confirmed by the Senate.
On September 18, 2020, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away only six weeks before the 2020 presidential election. Despite the short time period and contrary to Senator McConnell’s reasoning that a Supreme Court Justice vacancy occurring during a presidential election year should be selected by the winner of that election, Senator McConnell vowed that a nominee submitted by President Trump would get a Senate vote. President Donald Trump nominated Judge Amy Coney Barrett and McConnell engineered a floor vote only eight days before the 2020 election. On October 26, 2020 Judge Barrett was confirmed 52 – 48.
On January 27, 2022 Associate Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer announced his intention to retire from the Supreme Court at the end of the 2021 – 2022 Supreme Court term. Biden also reiterated his campaign promise to nominate the first Black woman to the Supreme Court. LEARN MORE
Policy Analysis
While nominations to the Supreme Court are always hardly fought battles that often leave both Republicans and Democrats bruised and battered, the announcement that Justice Stephen Breyer would retire from the Court has raised old grudges and even brought a new element to disagree with in the upcoming confirmation hearings.
Democrats are still fuming over the previous three nominations made to the Supreme Court. And now, their frustrations over those prior proceedings could inform how Democrats approach the upcoming confirmation hearings. Democrats still believe that the Republicans “stole a Supreme Court seat” in 2016 by refusing to grant even a hearing or a vote to President Barack Obama’s nominee. This was completely unprecedented. And those frustrations came to the forefront again in 2020 when Senator McConnell went against his own words and reasoning to rush the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett one week before the presidential election. This was to ensure that a Republican president would submit the nomination instead of a Democratic President. Because of the hypocrisy of Senator McConnell, Democrats will likely take an aggressive approach to securing President Biden’s nominee with the thought that a nominee should be confirmed prior to a possible switch to a Republican Senate majority after the 2022 elections. Any delay in confirming Biden’s nominee could lead to more Republican obstruction akin to what they did in delaying and eventually derailing the Merrick Garland nomination for nine months in 2016.
Photo taken from: Goad News
(click or tap to enlargen)
During his 2016 campaign and in order to give his campaign a boost, President Biden made a promise to nominate a Black woman to the Supreme Court should a seat open up. While it looks like Biden seems intent on keeping that promise, his promise has infuriated many Republicans and conservatives. Many see his campaign promise as an “affirmative action” pick instead of choosing the most qualified candidate regardless of race or gender. While this issue is looking more and more as a likely rallying cry for those opposed to a possible Biden nominee these critics have overlooked an important point in staking out their position. A person of color or a woman chosen as the nominee won’t be chosen only because they are a person of color or a woman. They are almost certain to be just as qualified as any male or white candidate out there.
For Republicans and other critics to oppose this nomination by first insinuating that a person of color or a woman is not qualified – without even knowing who the nominee is yet – shows how out of touch these critics are to what many women and persons of color have accomplished. The first impression when mentioning any candidate should be on the qualifications the candidate possesses and not that they are not qualified simply because they are a woman or person of color.
Names have already been tossed around and among the Black women being mentioned there is a California state supreme court justice (Leondra Kruger), a woman who clerked for outgoing Justice Breyer (Ketanji Brown Jackson) and a woman considered an expert in employment and labor law (J. Michelle Childs).
Clearly, these women are women who have worked hard and are supremely qualified for a seat on the Supreme Court. It would be disappointing to have their candidacies dismissed because of accusations that they are being considered only because they are a woman or a person of color.
President Biden has not revealed whom he will nominate to the Supreme Court yet but it looks like battle lines are being drawn and positions are being staked out to support or oppose the eventual nominee. All that is left now is to find out whom the President will choose and let the confirmation hearings play out. 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 Rod@USResistnews.org.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
American Bar Association (ABA) – guideline on how (ABA) Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary rates federal judicial nominees.
Demand Justice – non – profit group’s webpage on proposal on how to diversify the federal bench.
Two Federal Agencies Clash Over the Rollout of 5G Technology
Two Federal Agencies Clash Over the Rollout of 5G Technology
Technology Policy Brief #68 | By: Salim Rizvi | February 7, 2022
Header photo taken from: Getty Images
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more technology policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Day to News (.com)
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
After weeks of haggling and scrambling over the rollouts of new 5G wireless network services near airports, the federal regulator of airlines operations i.e. The Federal Aviation Administration (F.A.A.) and wireless communication companies have agreed upon a system to fly planes safely even as the new wireless technology is rolled out.
The 5G service was scheduled to roll out in Dec, 2021 but concerns were raised by airlines industry about the interference with the key device in cockpits that helps pilots to land planes safely. The radio altimeter uses the same frequencies as the C-band being used by the 5G wireless technology. There were fears of disruptions of passenger and cargo flights due to the rollouts of 5G wireless services which carry possible risk of interference with the landing equipment of the planes.
As suggested by some airlines, the F.A.A. had restricted the 5G network services from beaming signals within a 2-mile radius of major airports.
Policy Analysis
The airlines industry and the FAA have been at odds with the telecom companies and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) over the risk of interference with the key aviation signals. FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr openly criticized the FAA for restricting the 5G technology roll out..The telecom companies cite the example of some European countries where 5G technology is being used around airports. But the aviation industry points out that in Europe 5G technology uses 3.4 to 3.8 GHz, which is the slower range of spectrum, while US 5G uses C-Band which is from 4.2 to 4.4 GHz, the range that could interfere with the radio frequency of radar altimeters in the cockpit.
Now, with the new understanding, the F.A.A. and the telecom companies seem to be working on a long-term solution. They are working to get the exact locations of the 5G transmitters near airports and to try and mitigate the frequency interference.
The F.A.A. says the telecom companies have shared more information about the locations of 5G transmitters, which it says may help in analyzing the data and the interference risk to the key aviation devices. The airlines industry has been calling for the upgrade of the radio altimeter devices in the planes which ensures safe operations of flights along with the new wireless technology.
Photo taken from: Tech Tip Saz
(click or tap to enlargen)
Why do we need this 5G technology?
This is the fifth-generation technology in which the major telecom companies in US have invested billions of dollars.This new wireless technology is being presented as the technology which guides the future of businesses and communications the world over. The telecom experts say the new 5G wireless technology makes internet access faster which is being touted by the telecom companies as good for both businesses and individual customers, as it improves access to internet.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
FCC – Federal Communications Commission
https://www.fcc.gov/document/carr-statement-biden-5g-delay
FAA – Federal Aviation Administration
https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-statements-5g
Airlines for America – This organization advocates on behalf of the US Airlines industry. The organization includes members like Delta Airlines, United Airlines as well as shipping companies like UPS and FedEx.
A Judge’s Gavel Keeps the Oil Drills from Spinning – for the Time Being
A Judge’s Gavel Keeps the Oil Drills from Spinning – for the Time Being
Environmental Policy Brief #134 | By: Todd J. Broadman | February 2, 2022
Header photo taken from: KCRW
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more environmental policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: CNBC
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
On January 27, the country’s largest ever oil and gas lease sales were canceled by a federal judge. A total of 308 tracts totaling nearly 1.7 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico had been auctioned to thirty-three oil companies – Shell, BP, Chevron and Exxon Mobil among them. $192 million had been paid to the government for drilling rights.
In his ruling, Judge Rudolph Contreras of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, said that the Interior Department “acted arbitrarily and capriciously in excluding foreign consumption from their greenhouse gas emissions.” And by this, Judge Contreras meant that the administration was required to calculate the greenhouse gas impact if the leases were not exercised and foreign oil sources were used as a substitute. Under the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, the federal government must factor-in environmental damage before issuing such leases. The Department of the Interior is responsible for overseeing this process.
Back in early 2020, a pillar of candidate Biden’s campaign had been: “no more drilling on federal lands, period. Period, period, period.” And true to his word, soon after taking office, he signed an executive order that halted the issuance of new leases. In response to that order though, Republican attorneys general from 13 states sued and won on the grounds that lease sales must be held for those with scheduled auction dates (from the previous administration). Rather than face possible contempt of court charges, Interior Secretary Deb Haaland proceeded with the sale.
Prominent environmental organizations brought the lawsuit and are pleased with the outcome. Earthjustice’s counsel Brettny Hardy, said “This is huge, it requires the bureau to go back to the drawing board and actually consider the climate costs before it offers these leases for sale.” Hallie Templeton of Friends of the Earth, added that “We will continue to hold the Biden administration accountable for making unlawful decisions that contradict its pledge to take swift, urgent action on code red climate and environmental justice priorities.”
Over and above a warming climate, the unfolding environmental disaster in Peru underscores the additional ongoing risks of drilling at sea. It is now estimated that approximately 12,000 barrels of oil – equivalent to half a million gallons – spilled near the port city of Callao when tsunami waves triggered by a volcanic explosion caused a rupture of the terminal’s submarine pipeline. Peru’s Foreign Ministry has described it as the worst ecological disaster in recent times.
Policy Analysis
In line with Biden’s pledge, The International Energy Agency has declared that in order to avoid climate disaster, there can be no new major fossil fuel projects. In fact, three congressional Democrats had filed a court brief in support of the environment groups in this case. Raúl Grijalva, chair of the House natural resources committee, said “These leases were a climate disaster waiting to happen.”
The American Petroleum Institute, representing the oil firms whose leases were canceled, see this federal court decision very differently: “We are reviewing this disappointing decision and considering our options. Offshore energy development plays a critical role in strengthening our nation’s economy and energy security,” said their spokesperson.
The ruling means that the Interior Department must now carry out a new environmental analysis that accounts for the greenhouse gas emissions that would result from the eventual development and production of the leases. And once a comprehensive analysis is in hand, the agency will then have the option of again holding a sale for such leases. Meanwhile, the administration has proposed another round of oil and gas sales in Wyoming, Colorado, Montana and other states.
Photo taken from: The Houston Chronicle
(click or tap to enlargen)
The country’s dependence upon fossil fuels will continue to exert pressure upon an administration that is putting in place policies that transition away from carbon. Although this particular win is hopeful, the longer-term tug of war played out in the courts will likely not be won by environmental groups but by economic interests that tie the country’s deep dependence on petroleum to growth and jobs.
Though a step in the right direction, even with a moratorium on new leases on federal lands, Biden’s promised CO2 reduction to over 50% below 2005 levels by 2030, is unlikely to be realized.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
https://earthjustice.org/ wields the power of law and the strength of partnership to protect people’s health, to preserve magnificent places and wildlife, to advance clean energy, and to combat climate change.
https://biologicaldiversity.org/ works to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction.
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/ provides data-rich, actionable perspectives on key issues shaping the practice of law and preview what to expect across the legal landscape in the year ahead.
SUGGESTIONS DEMOCRATS NEED TO WIN THE MID-TERMS
SUGGESTIONS DEMOCRATS NEED TO WIN THE MID-TERMS
A U.S. RESIST NEWS EDITORIAL
February 01, 2022
Header photo taken from: Climate Advisers
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more U.S. Resist News editorials from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Salon (.com)
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
At the moment things look a bit dire for the chances of Democrats maintaining control of the House and Senate in the 2020 mid-term elections. Their attempt to pass voting rights legislation has been blocked (thanks to people in their own party), the massive Build Back Better Bill also has stalled in the Senate, inflation is on the rise, COVID is still very much with us, and President Biden’s favorability rating is at an all-time low.
So, is there any hope? Can the Democrats turn things around between now and November? We at U.S. RESIST NEWS believe it’s possible, but Democrats must take some important actions at the Federal, state and local levels to give themselves a chance. Here’s what we suggest they do:
# 1 Place the blame on the Republican Obstructionism: Democrats need to emphasize that the inability of government to better meet the needs of its citizens is mainly the result Republican inaction and oppositional tactics. The Dems can point out how Republican opposition to voting rights, climate change, education and health programs has been largely responsible for the inability of Congress to pass much needed legislation in these areas.
Photo taken from: Grist
# 2 Keep asking the question: What do Republicans stand for? As for as we can tell Republicans stand for little more than seizing power and clinging to it. In this current Congress (and during much of the Trump administration) Republicans have put forward no major policy proposals and spend most of their time voting down Biden’s legislative agenda. The Democrats should turn Republican obstructionism against Republicans, and ask at every campaign rally: “What do Republicans stand for? What do they stand for?”
Photo taken from: Al Jazeera
# 3 Publicize the January 6th Committee’s investigation: The House Committee to investigate the January 6th insurrection seems to be making headway. Despite the refusal of leading Trump associates to testify, the Committee has interviewed hundreds of witnesses and compiled extensive documentation related to January 6th. They seem poised to tell a fairly detailed story of efforts led by President Trump to overturn the 2020 presidential election and democracy itself. This story needs to be widely told so that the American people have the facts of what really happened on Jan 6th. The House Committee plans to hold televised hearings on January 6th, which will be a great way to expose the atrocity the deliberate efforts before, during, and after that day to overturn the election results
Photo taken from: KTVZ
# 4 Make abortion rights a key campaign issue
The Supreme Court has been sending signals that it may soon overturn the doctrine of a woman’s right to choose to have an abortion. That doctrine was estaboished in the Roe v Wade decision in 1973. The Court’s recent decision to let stand an anti-abortion law in Texas, and its promise to render decisions on the legality of anti-abortion legislation in Mississippi, indicate that near-term court rulings may soon make Roe v Wade obsolete. It will be an extremely unpopular decision in the eyes of the vast numbers of American women who support abortion rights. Democrats should go all out to voice their opposition to any effort to overturn or limit Roe v Wade. Doing so would help the Dems garner the support of millions of American women.
Photo taken from: Women’s eNews
#5 Introduce More Targeted Legislation
The pieces of legislation the Democrats can get pass through Congress the better their ability to score points with voters. During this past year, Democrats failed to get large pieces of their legislative agenda passed. Part of the problem was the size and scope of their proposals. Both the Build Back Better Bill and the Voting Rights Bills had many different and varied components within them. The size of the bills made them difficult to explain to the general public and made it easy for Senators opposed to certain parts of the legislation to say “no” to the entire package. For example, take the climate change and universal pre-school components of the Build Back Better bill out of that bill and propose them as stand-alone legislation. The two voting rights bills could be d-coupled and broken out into small legislative proposals. By breaking these large pieces of legislation up into smaller pieces, Democrats will also force Republicans to go public with their opposition to popular pieces of legislation.
Photo taken from: The Republic Monitor
# 6 Support voter turnout and election monitoring efforts: It goes without saying that the Democrats will need to do more than their usual get-ot-the-vote efforts if they have any hope of winning the mid-terms. Especially in Red States that have enacted hostile voter registration and election laws the Democrats will need to implement intense voter turnout campaigns, post legal challenges to restrictive voter laws in states that have them, and perhaps consider placing voting monitors at polling places to ensure that no one is pressured and every citizen who shows up gets the opportunity to vote.
These suggestions constitute a challenging but doable set of actions for Democrats to take in their approach to the mid-terms. Party leaders at the national, state and local levels, and of course the Democratic National Committee need to get behind such a strategy if the Democrats want to expand their leadership positions in the House and Senate.
Photo taken from: Center for American Progress
Eye on the Fed
Eye on the Fed
Economic Policy Brief #TBA | By: Greg Ziegler | January 31, 2022
Header photo taken from: ABC News
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more economic policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: News Text Area (.com)
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) concluded the first of its eight scheduled meetings for 2022 on Wednesday, January 26th. The Committee is comprised of twelve members and is responsible for overseeing the nation’s monetary policy to promote the nation’s economic goals. At the conclusion of its meeting the Committee issued a press release summarizing the key points the Committee considered in its deliberations stating that, “indicators of economic activity and employment have continued to strengthen,” and that, “job gains have been solid in recent months, and the unemployment rate has declined substantially.” Further, the Committee communicated the actions it would take, stating that it, “seeks to achieve maximum employment and inflation at the rate of 2 percent over the longer run. In support of these goals, the Committee decided to keep the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent.” The Committee conceded that, “with inflation well above 2 percent and a strong labor market, the Committee expects it will soon be appropriate to raise the target range for the federal funds rate.”
Policy Analysis
The Federal Reserve rate is the interest rate at which depository institutions lend balances at the Federal Reserve to other depository institutions overnight. This rate serves as a key tool that the Fed uses to impact economic policy. By lowering this rate, the Federal Reserve makes it easier to borrow, which increases consumer borrowing, which in turn increases consumer spending, which may contribute to the economy growing too quickly, which can increase inflation. Doing the reverse, raising the Federal Reserve rate, makes it more expensive to borrow, which should lead to less consumer borrowing and spending, while the reduction in spending should slow the growth of the economy and lead to an inflation reduction.
Currently, the Inflation rate is 7% which is the highest it’s been in the last 40 years (10.3% in 1981), making the FOMC’s decision to leave the rate unchanged mildly surprising as it takes time for rate changes to achieve their desired effect. The Committee did hedge its bets and say that it is likely that they will raise the interest rate at their next meeting in March (March 15th and 16th).
The two ingredients of a healthy economy.
Photo taken from:
The Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco
(click or tap to enlargen)
The stock market showed some volatility leading up to the Fed’s decision on the Federal Reserve rate. The Dow was down 920 points intraday on Monday the 24th, and down over 640 points intraday both Tuesday and Wednesday, closing down over 350 points on Wednesday, before rallying to finish up 590 points on Friday. For the week the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed up 1.92%. Similarly, the S&P 500 Index closed down 58 points on Wednesday and 54 points on Thursday before rallying to close up 95 points on Friday. For the week the S&P Index closed up 1.73%.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Federal Open Market Committee Meeting Press Release
https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/fomc.htm
Current Inflation Rates
U.S. Historical Inflation Rates
https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/
S&P 500 Index Historical Prices
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/%5EGSPC/history?p=%5EGSPC
Dow Jones Index Historical Prices
Long COVID and the Economy
Long COVID and the Economy
Health & Gender Policy Brief #146 | By: Rosalind Gottfried | January 26, 2022
Header photo taken from: iStock
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more health & gender policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: New Jersey Business Magazine
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Long Covid may affect well over a million people who contracted the virus. The syndrome manifests in pulmonary, cardiovascular, and nervous system symptoms which can persist for months after initial illness and may even occur in those who never were sick initially. Ailments can include shortness of breath; erratic heartbeats and blood pressure; fatigue; pain, and an inability to concentrate and a general “fuzziness.” Those suffering from these conditions can also succumb to depression and anxiety, whether that is a primary symptom or a consequence of the fall out form the syndrome. In a study of over 250,000 Covid patients, over half expressed some declines six months after the initial infection. These include physical and psychological impairments. Twenty percent reported a decline in mobility; 25% felt a decline in concentration; 20% experienced hair loss and/or rashes; and many people reported cardiovascular and gastrointestinal effects.
The fallout can be severe. The inability to work can result in loss of jobs and benefits such as health insurance. Many who must quit, or get fired, and suffer multiple illnesses are unable to pay for care and are losing homes, cars, and potentially family who cannot cope with the stressors. Some people who have long term health insurance have reported that their insurers are denying claims as is the government disability offices of the Social Security Administration. The National Institute of Health has committed 1.15 billion dollars to study long term Covid.
The impact of deaths from Covid goes beyond the number of people who have passed away. If we consider a deathrate of 1 million people, and calculate Years of Life Lost (YLL), the average is nine years because many covid patients are older. But other people have succumbed from Covid and they had potentially longer lives. Estimates suggest that the total years of life lost will exceed ten million from deaths. The recent reporting of long Covid suggests that the loss to the economy, in terms of loss of producers (work) and consumers will have a far-reaching impact than just those due to death.
Policy Analysis
With estimates of those who have had Covid reaching 50 million, it is difficult to estimate how many will ultimately succumb to long Covid though it is surely clear that the cost to the economy will be severe. There are at least two aspects to this situation; the first is paying for the care and treatment of the syndrome and the support of the those afflicted. The government safety net must be addressed as individual needs may far surpass current provisions. The second issue is to compensate for the lack of labor force participation and the reduced consumption of those who cannot return to the paths they were on previous to the pandemic.
The medical professionals need to be able to define the syndrome so that people can qualify for aid. Currently, it is vaguely described as persistent symptoms which cannot be explained by another condition.
The implications of COVID-19 for mental health and substance abuse.
Photo taken from: Kaiser Family Foundation
(click or tap to enlargen)
The government should develop a policy to subsidize those who cannot work, or who can only work part time, so that they don’t fall into worse situations from which they will be unable to extract themselves. Some fear that the depression from the loss of previous work and quality of life could result in a swelling of suicide and opioid use.
Private employers would be wise to allow people who suffer from Covid related syndromes to work part time; to work from home; and to keep benefits such as health insurance. The prevalence of long term Covid deserve the attention, concern, and resources we can muster as a nation.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
https://www.forbes.com/sites/patrickwwatson/2021/06/14/the-long-covid-economy/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/12/09/long-covid-work-unemployed/
https://fortune.com/2021/11/16/long-covid-pandemic-physical-economic-effects-vaccination-treatment/
The U.S. House Select Committee Investigation of the January 6 Attack on the Capitol: Part 7
The U.S. House Select Committee Investigation of the January 6 Attack on the Capitol: Part 7
Social Justice Policy Brief #31 | By: Erika Shannon | January 27, 2022
Header photo taken from: ABC News – Walt Disney
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more social justice policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Michigan News
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The one-year anniversary of the attack on our nation’s Capitol may have passed, but one thing is clear: the House Select Committee is no longer playing games with their investigation. Their quest for answers has been long, full of obstacles, yet they continue to try and delve through all the information they can possibly get their hands on. They have faced people trying to stonewall the investigation, as well as a severe lack of cooperation from the former President himself.
Most recently, the House Select Committee issued subpoenas to four more Trump allies who publicly promoted unsupported claims about the election and participated in attempts to disrupt/delay the certification of the election results. This includes Jenna Ellis, Sidney Powell, Boris Epshtein, and Rudy Giuliani. Giuliani himself actively promoted election fraud claims and tried to convince state legislators to take steps to overturn the 2020 election results.
The day after issuing those four subpoenas, the House Select Committee issued subpoenas to Nicholas J. Fuentes and Patrick Casey. These two are leaders of the “America First” or “Groyper” movement and were present on the Capitol grounds on January 6, 2021. They also participated in events prior to that day, where unsupported claims about election fraud were promoted. The two are also being investigated for the tens of thousands of dollars worth of Bitcoin they were wired from a French computer programmer. The FBI is trying to assess whether these funds were linked to the Capitol attack or otherwise used to fund illegal activity.
While he was not formally subpoenaed, talk show host Sean Hannity was sent a letter by the House Select Committee; in the letter, they are asking for his cooperation to voluntarily answer questions about matters including communications between himself, the former President, Mark Meadows, and others in question regarding the events of January 6. The committee already has communications between Hannity and those listed, and at this point they are looking for clarification from him.
The daughter of the former President has also been issued a request for information from the panel, though not a subpoena. The House Select Committee sent her a letter similar to Sean Hannity’s, where they are asking her to voluntarily come forth and give information relevant to January 6’s events. There is evidence that Ivanka Trump was in direct contact with Donald Trump at key moments on January 6, 2021 which means she likely has key information that would help the panel figure out how the day’s events truly unfolded, and who is to blame.
Individuals are not the only ones facing subpoenas and scrutiny from the House Select Committee. The committee has received inadequate responses to prior requests for information from several social media companies. In response, the panel issued four subpoenas to social media companies as apart of its investigation — Alphabet, Meta, Reddit, and Twitter. There are suspicions that the platforms were used to not only spread misinformation and hate, but to plan domestic violent extremism and harbor efforts to overturn the 2020 election. The House Select Committee wants to ensure that events such as the ones that unfolded on January 6th at the nation’s Capitol cannot be planned so easily on social media, and they are requiring the cooperation of these four companies to make that happen.
Several of Trump’s former allies have already come forth and provided testimony, likely against the former President’s wishes. There is hope that those trying to hold out for as long as they can will end up coming in to give depositions; until then, several key players from Trump’s inner circle have already come forth. This includes William Barr, Keith Kellogg, Jeffrey Rosen, Kayleigh McEnany, Ali Alexander, and Kash Patel.
Photo taken from: The Mercury News
(click or tap to enlargen)
It is obvious that the House Select Committee has a plethora of information to wade through at this point, even though there are some who are not cooperating. What does the committee do with the information they receive, though? As it turns out, the committee has put together five teams made up of their staff members to help sort through information. The “Inside the Fence” team is dedicated to understanding the preparation and response to the event by federal and local law enforcement. The “follow the money” team examines the funding for demonstrations against the election results. A third team investigates online information and extremist activity. A fourth team is looking at the pressure campaigns in Washington DC and in state capitols to overturn election results or delay certification of electors. The fifth team keeps their focus on organizers of the demonstrations on the National Mall at the Capitol.
Moving forward, the panel is focusing much of its energy on the task of recording and listening to a slate of public hearings to be able to tell the story of January 6 from start to finish, along with one or more written reports. The reports will detail the events of that day and also make recommendations on how to prevent similar situations from occurring again.
This Brief is part of an ongoing series in the Select Committee’s investigation; further updates will be provided as the investigation continues.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
To read the House Select Committee’s letters to those mentioned above, or for daily updates, visit the Committee website.
The Healthcare System in US Prisons is in Drastic Need of Improvement
The Healthcare System in US Prisons is in Drastic Need of Improvement
Health Policy Brief #145 | By: Inijah Quadri | January 25, 2022
Header photo taken from: Modern Healthcare
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more health and gender policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: NICIC.gov
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Getting ill in prison is a bad idea. Because of years of underfunding and privatization, the medical treatment provided to those who are jailed is deplorable.
Almost four times as many convicts over the age of 55 are in prison now as there were at the beginning of this century. Because of this, the prevalence of diabetes and heart disease – to name just a few – has skyrocketed. Given their high rates of addiction, young offenders in prison aren’t exactly the healthiest of all groups. Hepatitis C infection rates are 35 percent higher in prisons than in the general population, despite the fact that inmates make up just 1% of the population. As research explains, “They are the most costly and the illest people in the population.”
In the last decade or two, most states have outsourced jail health care to private organizations. That creates a motivation for cost-saving measures. As such, there are several tales of people dying in vain as it might take weeks for an inmate to visit a doctor after complaining about the same symptoms many times. True, convicts have tried to escape during medical transports to hospitals, but that is not enough reason for guards and other personnel to typically assume that detainees are lying about being unwell.
Chronic health issues, mental illness, and drug addiction are more prevalent among inmates and detainees in immigration facilities. Even before, as well as during and after jail or detention, people often get subpar medical care. This only serves to exacerbate their predicament.
Policy Analysis
Health needs of prisoners can be addressed through policies like expanding access to substance use disorder treatment, family planning, and mental health services, all of which are supported by the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP). As incarceration and detention are both harmful to health, the AAFP advocates for sentencing nonviolent criminals and drug possession offenders to shorter terms of imprisonment and abolishing detention for people seeking refuge in the United States on lawful grounds.
The American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) supports efforts to improve the current bail system and reduce the negative health outcomes of those awaiting trial in prisons and jails. Providing better health care in prisons and detention centers and enhancing the coordination of services after release are two possible interventions that might enhance the health of those who are jailed.
Photo taken from: The Pew Charitable Trust
(click or tap to enlargen)
Volunteers in correctional or detention facilities can help family physicians improve the health of those behind bars, as can supporting collaborations between those institutions and community health services, integrated care models, and more connections to resources for housing, employment, and mental health.
Prison health, according to some, would be improved if it were integrated into the local health care system. Whether it’s opioid addiction or an infectious disease outbreak, communities aren’t immune to what occurs inside their jails.
However, the majority of non-prisoners don’t recognize how health issues in prisons influence their own lives. For individuals who society deems to be deserving of punishment, therapy may never be a high priority.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
American College of Correctional Physicians (https://accpmed.org/)
National Correctional Health Care Commission (http://www.ncchc.org/)
The Center for Prisoner Health and Human Rights (www.prisonerhealth.org/)